<&A a /.. BT&.5G. 

UNITED STATESOF AMERICA. 



EXEGETICAL ESSAYS 



SEVERAL WORDS RELATING TO 



FUTURE PUNISHMENT. 



BY THE LATE 



MOSES STUART. 




PHILADELPHIA: 

PRESBYTERIAN PUBLICATION COMMITTEE, 

1334 CHESTNUT STREET. 
NEW YORK : A. D. F. RANDOLPH, 770 BROADWAY. 



py 



&1 



ftl 



Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1S67, by 
\VM. L. HIXDEBTJRN, Tbeasueeb, 

IN TRUST FOB THE 

PRESBYTERIAN PUBLICATION COMMITTEE, 

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the Eastern District 
of Pennsylvania. 



STEREOTYPED BY MACKELLAR, SMITHS & JORDAN, 
PHILADELPHIA. 



INTRODUCTION. 



There is no book more imperatively demanded 
by the religious controversies of the day than the 
one which we now reproduce. First issued thirty- 
seven years since, it has gone out of print, and is 
little known to the present generation ; but the ques- 
tions which it discusses and settles are among those 
which now most agitate the Christian mind. What 
does the Bible teach with regard to the future 
world? — Do the sacred writers assert that there is 
an endless punishment in reserve for the ungodly? 
— Can any other interpretation than this fairly be 
given to the terms used in the Scriptures in de- 
scribing the future of the impenitent ? Than these, 
no questions more momentous can present them- 
selves to dying men ; and these our author under- 
takes to answer. The name of MOSES STUART 
is an assurance that the discussion will be logical, 

3 



4 INTRODUCTION. 

learned, and thoroughly honest : an examination 
of the work will verify this assurance. There is 
in it no concealment, no dodging of difficulties, 
no special pleading. As a true scholar, he seeks 
to learn that he may teach. His conclusions are 
irresistible. 

To the present edition a syllabus of the con- 
tents of the book has been added ; and in some of 
the sections the texts have been distributed under 
heads, so as to be more readily apprehended by 
the reader. 

That the cause of truth will be served by this 
publication, we have no doubt. May the God of 
Truth go with and bless it ! 



PREFACE. 



As no subject can be presented to the human mind so deeply 
interesting as the inquiry, whether we shall be happy or 
miserable in a future world through endless ages, so no 
apology is needed for choosing such a topic of discussion in 
the following pages. Very many embrace the opinion, that 
the present is not our only state of probation ; and, of course, 
that if our lot be that of punishment in a future world, yet 
our condition even then is not to be regarded as hopeless. 
Has this any foundation in the word of God, or does it pro- 
ceed rather from our wishes than from reason and evidence ? 

The following pages do not profess to treat of these ques- 
tions at large. It would require a volume of much greater 
size than the present, to do even tolerable justice to the whole 
subject. My design, however, is to discuss, almost entirely in 
a philological way, some of the most interesting topics rela- 
tive to future punishment. This I have endeavored to do, 
unembarrassed by any particular opinions or systems. My 
conscience bears me testimony, that I have endeavored to 
come at my subject in the way of an original and disinterested 
inquirer. If I have not always succeeded in doing this, I must 
beg the reader to attribute it to human infirmity, and not to 
design. 

One thing I do earnestly desire to say to the reader with 
affection and deep concern: a Look well to it how thou 
examinest and judgest ; it is for thy life !" If it w ere a matter 
of taste, or of common lexicographal or grammatical dispute, 

1& 5 



6 PREFACE. 

it would be of little consequence to give such an admonition, 
for the consequences could not be very important. But it is 
not so here ; for the interests of eternity may be connected with 
the decision which the reader will make. As a philologist, I 
am unable to doubt the certainty of the conclusions to which 
the examination that is detailed in the following sheets has 
led me. Deeply impressed with this myself, it is natural that 
I should wish to impress others in like manner. If they do 
not agree with me, after examining the subject, they will not, 
I trust, take umbrage at the manner in which it has been 
brought before them. 

As my object is discussion on original and fundamental 
grounds, which have respect to the Hebrew and Greek Scrip* 
tures, so it must follow that my book can be read intelligibly, 
throughout, only by such as have some knowledge of these 
languages. Yet I have endeavored so to write, that intelli- 
gent readers, unacquainted with Hebrew and Greek, may get 
at the scope of my arguments ; and I would fain hope that in 
this I have succeeded. 

I only add, that the time seems to have come when appeal 
to the original Scriptures appears to be the only effectual 
method of satisfying the public mind, in regard to any contro- 
verted religious subject. That there is a portion of the public 
who will not be satisfied even with this, I deeply regret, but 
am constrained to believe. Yet, since far the greater part 
profess to believe in the declarations of the Bible, to this I 
have made the appeal ; and by this only I desire the doctrine 
in question, and my little treatise respecting it, to be tried. 

M. STUART. 

Andover, Oct. 1830. 



SYLLABUS OF CONTENTS. 



AIHN and AlflNIOS. 

PAGE 

IMPOETANCE OF THE SUBJECT 11 

1. Classical Use of the Words 24 

2. New Testament Use 26 

AII2N. 

I. FIKST GENEEAL CLASS OF MEANINGS 27 

1. An Indefinite Period of Time — Forever. 28 

(a) Eeferring to God 28 

(6) Eeferring to the Happiness of the Pious 30 

(c) An Unlimited Period 32 

2. An Indefinite Period in the Past 36 

3. Age or Dispensation 36 

n. SECOND GENEEAL CLASS OF MEANINGS. 36 

4. World — Present or Future 41 

(a) With Eeference to Time or Duration 41 

(V To the World with its Cares, etc 43 

(c) The World itself — Mundus 44 

7 



8 Syllabus of Contents. 

PAGE 

in. PECULIAE MEANING 48 

5. Generation of Men 48 

IV. 6. IN EESPECT TO FUTUKE PUNISHMENT 49 

GENEEAL SUMMAEY OF MEANINGS OF Al6v 51 



I. FIEST GENEEAL CLASS OF MEANINGS 59 

1 . Perpetuae — Never-ending — Eternae 59 

(a) In Eegard to the Happiness of the Eighteous 59 

(6) In Eegard to God or his Glory 63 

(c) Miscellaneous Cases 63 

II. SECOND GENEEAL CLASS OF MEANINGS.. 64 

2. Ancient — Long Since 64 

3. In Eespect to Future Punishment 65 

GENEEAL SUMMAEY OF THE MEANINGS OF 

AitovLog 66 



oSiy 



OLD TESTAMENT MEANING OF HOLAM 69 

1. Eternity , 69 

2. An Indefinite Period 72 

3. Time Past 73 

GENEEAL SUMMAEY OF MEANINGS OF 74 



Syllabus of Contents. 9 

AinN and aiunios. 

PAGE 

I. IN THE SEPTUAGINT... 76 

II. BEAEING OF THE SUBJECT ON FUTUKE 

PUNISHMENT 78 

III. EESULTS . 88 

IY. Al6v and Aifoiog IN THE LEXICONS 90 



h)8& 



USUAL MEANING OF THE WOBD SHEOL 104 

I. ITS OBVIOUS OE LITEEAL SENSE..... 105 

1. The Under- World — Eegion of the Dead. 105 

2. The Common Translation of Sheol 127 

3. Use of Figurative Language 129 

II. SECONDABY SIGNIFICATION OF SHEOL 143 

Sheol designating the Future World of Woe 145 

III. POPULAE VIEWS OF SHEOL... 156 

Eemarks on Popular Views of Sheol 164 

IV. GENEEAL CONCLUSION 168 



'AIAH2. 

I. CLASSICAL SENSE OF HADES 170 

II. AS USED BY THE SACEED WEITEES 176 

1. The Under-World 178 



10 Syllabus of Contents. 

PAGE 

2. The Eegion of the Dead 178 

3. The Grave 183 

4. Tartarus — The Eegion of Woe 184 

III. EEMAEKS ON THE USE OF HADES IN THE 

SCKIPTUEES 184 



TAPTAP02. 

Tartarus 187 

TEENNA. 

Gehenna 191 

GENEEAL EEMAEKS 201 



AII1N and AK1NI02. 

IMPORTANCE OF THE SUBJECT. 

To a being endowed with a spirit which can 
never cease to exist, and who can live at most but 
a few years in the present world, the question, 
" What is to be his future condition ?" is the most 
important question that can possibly be agitated. 
Will his condition after death be unchangeable ? 
Will his probation be at an end, when his present 
life shall cease? And if so, on what does the 
happiness or misery of his future state depend ? 

An instinctive desire of happiness and dread 
of misery form an elementary part of the nature 
which man possesses. They are interwoven with 
the very being of his soul, and must be immortal 
as the spirit from which they spring. At the 
prospect of happiness, he is filled with delightful 
anticipations, which make existence a blessing, 
and cause the soul to exult in the possession of 
its powers and capacities; at the prospect of 
misery without relief and without end, an instinct- 
ive horror closes every avenue of pleasure, and 

11 



12 Al(bv and Alcbvto^. 

the soul loathes its own existence, and would fain 
resign the possession of it. 

This, however, it cannot do. He who made us 
in his own image, made us immortal like himself; 
immortal in regard to the powers and faculties, 
as well as the existence, of the soul ; the immortal 
subjects, therefore, of happiness or misery in the 
future state. We can no more cease to be the 
subjects of the one or the other, than we can 
cease to be what we are, — rational, sentient beings, 
whose very constitution, whose essential nature, 
necessarily involves with its existence the expe- 
rience of either happiness or misery. 

However discrepant the views of men may be, 
in some respects, with regard to our condition in 
a future state, there will be, there can be, no im- 
portant difference of opinion in regard to the 
point now under consideration ; at least there can 
be no important difference among those who be- 
lieve in the immortality of the soul. To all such, 
then, the questions, Whether we shall be happy 
or miserable in another world ? and, Whether we 
shall be unchangeably so ? are of such unspeak- 
able moment, as to make all other questions 
appear to be of comparatively small importance. 

How are these great questions to be answered ? 
The immortal soul, that is not sunk in the grossest 



Importance of the Subject 13 

ignorance, or rendered insensible by the most de- 
basing sensuality and love of the world, cannot 
but feel an interest — an all-pervading interest — 
in this inquiry. Good men exhibit their interest 
in it, by long-continued and solicitous inquiries 
into their spiritual condition and prospects ; and 
even the wicked, in most cases, exhibit their inter- 
est also in the question, by their constant efforts, 
in one way and another, to bring themselves into 
a condition of quiet with regard to it. 

All sober and rational men will surely be dis- 
posed to ask, From what quarter can these all- 
important inquiries have light thrown upon them ? 
What cheering sun is there, which will shed his 
radiance over the darkness that rests upon them, 
and disclose the object of them to us by the full 
light of day ? 

And is not the answer to these last inquiries 
comparatively easy? The light of nature can 
never scatter the darkness in question. This 
light has never yet sufficed to make even the 
question clear, to any portion of our benighted 
race, Whether the soul of man is immortal? 
Cicero, incomparably the most able defender of 
the soul's immortality of whom the heathen world 
can yet boast, very ingenuously confesses that, 
after all the arguments which he had adduced in 

2 



14 Accbv and Ald)vco<z. 

order to confirm the doctrine in question, it so fell 
out, that his mind was satisfied of it, only when 
directly employed in contemplating the arguments 
adduced in its favor. At all other times, he fell 
unconsciously into a state of doubt and darkness. 
It is notorious, also, that Socrates, the next 
most able advocate among the heathen for the 
same doctrine, has adduced arguments to establish 
the never-ceasing existence of the soul, which 
will not bear the test of examination. Such is 
the argument by which he endeavors to prove, 
that we shall always continue to exist because w r e 
always have existed ; and this last proposition he 
labors to establish, on the ground that all our 
present acquisitions of knowledge are only so 
many reminiscences of what we formerly knew, 
in a state of existence antecedent to our present 
one. Unhappy lot of philosophy, to be doomed 
thus to prop itself up with supports so weak and 
fragile as this ! How can the soul be filled with 
consolation, in prospect of death, without some 
better and more cheering light than can spring 
from such a source? How can it quench its 
thirst for immortality, by drinking in such impure 
and turbid streams as these? Poor wandering 
heathen ! How true it is — and what a glorious, 
blessed truth it is — that "life and immortality 



Importance of the Subject. 15 

are brought to light in the gospel" ! It is equally 
true, that they are brought to light only there. 

Thus much, then, is certainly plain. If the 
heathen did not, and (all their circumstances and 
passions considered) could not, sufficiently answer 
the inquiry which respects the immortal exist- 
ence of the soul, much less could they satisfac- 
torily answer the question, Whether our future 
state is to be happy or miserable ? And if either, 
On what conditions is our happiness or misery 
suspended ? These awfully momentous questions, 
they never did answer. " The world by wisdom 
knew not God." Nor did they know that he had 
made man in his own image; much less that man 
had been redeemed by the death of God's own 
beloved Son. They did not know any thing 
definite, respecting either the happiness which 
the gospel proffers to the penitent and obedient, 
or the miseries which are threatened to the im- 
penitent and disobedient, in the world to come. 

Nor has all the light which has been cast upon 
the subject of the soul's immortality, since the 
gospel was first published, enabled men, independ- 
ently of the gospel itself, to demonstrate this 
truth ; certainly not to show, with any good de- 
gree of satisfaction, what the future state of the 
soul will be. 



16 Alwu and Aldyvto^. 

If there be any satisfactory light, then, on the 
momentous question of a future state, it must be 
sought from the word of God. After all the toil 
and pains of casuists and philosophers, it remains 
true, that the gospel, and the gospel only, has 
" brought life and immortality to light" in a satis- 
factory manner. 

Most men among us either expressly acknow- 
ledge' this, or else implicitly concede it. The 
latter even those do, who make strenuous efforts 
to show that- the Scriptures can be construed in 
such a way as to render the doctrine of the ulti- 
mate, universal happiness of mankind at least 
probable; although, at the same time, uncon- 
sciously perhaps to themselves, they reason from 
principles which are not deduced from the Scrip- 
tures, but from their own apprehensions in regard 
to what is proper or improper under the divine 
government of rational beings. 

The Bible, then, is the only sure source of know- 
ledge in regard to the future destiny of our race. 
This alone is to be relied on, in the ultimate settle- 
ment of the great question, whether we are to be 
forever happy or miserable. 

But how is this question to be settled by the 
Bible? Is this to be done by carrying along 
with us, when we go to interpret the Bible, prin- 



Importance oftte Subject. 17 

ciples which decide beforehand what, in our view, 
the Bible ought to speak, and to draw from these, 
conclusions as to what it does speak? Is any- 
other book on earth interpreted in this manner ? 
Or at least, if it be so, do not all men declaim 
against the unfairness and the partiality of such 
an interpretation? After all, surely it cannot 
be for the ultimate interest of any intelligent 
and rational being, who is favored with the Scrip- 
tures, to force on them a method of interpretation 
which he would complain of when applied to any 
other book. It cannot be for his ultimate in- 
terest, to make a mistake in respect to the tre- 
mendous subject of a future state. Above all, 
if it should at last prove to be true that the 
present life is the only state of probation for men, 
a mistake as to the consequences of this proba- 
tion must be of an importance which no language 
can describe, and of which no heart can even 
conceive. 

And even supposing that there is a future state 
of probation, which is disciplinary, and in which 
the wicked are subjected to pain and distress; 
what reasonable and considerate man would de- 
sire to incur the risk of this, by flattering him- 
self in such a way as to continue in his sinful 
course while in the present world, and venture 

2* 



18 Al(hv and Accovtoz. 

upon the consequences of this in the world to 
come? 

May it not be hoped, then, amid the conflicting 
spirit of the times, and the widely-spread belief 
that all our race will eventually be happy in 
another world, that there are some, at least, who 
will feel it to be their duty and their interest 
seriously and impartially to examine and con- 
sider what the Scriptures have said, relative to 
the important question about the duration of 
future happiness and misery ? I must hope that 
there are at least some (who have as yet been 
wandering in uncertainty, and who may have in- 
clined, or rather have wished, to believe that they 
shall be finally happy, and that the Bible has not 
decided the question against the ultimate hopes 
of those that die in a state of impenitency) who 
will now consent seriously and carefully to ex- 
amine the ground of their hopes and wishes, and 
to be guided by the sentiments of the Bible, in- 
vestigated by means of the usual and impartial 
principles of interpretation. 

For such, the following investigation is specially 
intended. It is not my design to occupy the whole 
ground, covered by the great question which re- 
lates to the inquiry, Whether our condition in a 
future world is immutable ? To do this, would 



Importance of the Subject. 19 

require a volume instead of a few pages. It would 
so multiply topics of consideration, also, as to 
have a tendency rather to distract and confuse the 
mind, than to enlighten and satisfy it in the most 
simple way. 

I purposely avoid, therefore, all remarks here 
on objections against the doctrine of endless future 
punishment, drawn from considerations respect- 
ing the divine benevolence, which the minds of 
many men appear to entertain, in consequence of 
reasoning abstractly and independently of the 
Scriptures about the nature of God and the desert 
of sin. To settle the question whether endless 
punishment is possible, before we come to the 
Scriptures for investigation, and then to search 
them merely to see whether we cannot find some- 
thing to confirm our views, or to remove the 
difficulties which the Bible throws in our way, is 
virtually to renounce the Scriptures as our guide, 
and to set up our own conclusions and reasonings 
in the place of them. But how are men to an- 
swer to their own consciences, and to that God 
who is the author of the Bible, for so doing? 
And after all, what is to be the ultimate rule of 
the divine proceedings, in regard to us? Are 
we at our own disposal ? Or are we in the hands 
of an almighty God ? Are our views and con- 



20 AIcjdv and Aldivio^ 

ceptions to be the rule of his dealings with us? 
or are his own views of right and wrong, of merit 
and desert, to guide his disposal of us and ours ? 
Supposing, then, that with the utmost confidence 
we cherish and advocate principles, in regard to 
the administration of the divine government, 
which in the end turn out to be inconsistent with 
the statutes of heaven as contained in the Bible : 
what influence will our belief and opinions have 
on the eternal Judge, in the great day of retribu- 
tion ? Can they have any ? And if not, of what 
avail is it for us to argue and decide, independ- 
ently of the Bible, and to risk our eternal sal- 
vation on conclusions which are made out in this 
manner ? 

I would hope that such considerations as 
these may have a tendency to check the prone- 
ness of some minds to indulge in a priori spe- 
culations on this great subject; and may help 
in persuading them to lend a listening ear to 
any serious and impartial attempt to describe 
the real state of Scripture testimony in regard 
to it. 

As the first subject of investigation I have 
chosen only one word, or, more correctly, only 
one species of words, used by the writers of the 
New Testament. It is in the New Testament 



Importance of the Subject. 21 

that " life and immortality are brought to light ;" 
and it is there, too, that we may, of course, expect 
the state and duration of either reward or punish- 
ment in the future world, to be most fully and 
clearly revealed. I seek not doubtful evidence. 
I aim to exhibit that which is, or ought to be, 
convincing. At least, I intend to exhibit that 
which my own mind is unable to resist, and 
which, I would hope, may assist others in their 
inquiries relative to our subject. 

These words are alwv and alaivtoc, (ceon and 
ceonios), commonly translated forever, ever, eternal, 
everlasting; specially so translated, when they are 
connected with objects that relate to the invisible 
world. I have been induced to select these words, 
because I have, at various times, and specially 
of late, met with not a few speculations and cri- 
ticisms on them, which are singular, and (in my 
view) widely departing from the sober rules of 
legitimate interpretation. I have seen, to my 
deep regret, many remarks on this awful subject, 
which seem to betray much levity and ineon- 
sideration of mind ; and not a few, also, which 
disclose a resolute determination (come what will 
of the laws of exegesis) to support notions on 
the subject of a future state, that have been adopted 
independently of Scriptural inquiry, and seem to 



22 Aldiv and Ahbvtos. 

be maintained in spite of all which the Bible has 
declared. 

I hope I shall not expose myself to censure 
here, by speaking thus respecting criticisms of 
this nature. I would not treat with disregard 
any opinion in theology or criticism, w T hich appears 
to be the offspring of serious investigation and 
real effort to seek after the truth, although its 
author may have greatly mistaken the path of 
truth. But when I see rash and adventurous 
criticisms thrown out before the public, which 
are evidently the offspring neither of patient 
investigation, nor yet of a serious desire to know 
what the Bible has decided, but intended only to 
remove the difficulties which the Scriptures throw 
in the way of opinions entertained by the authors 
of such criticisms, and to lull the consciences of 
men w4io are uneasy about the subject of future 
punishment, I feel constrained at least to make 
an effort, to bring before the public a full investi- 
gation of the meaning of the words in question, 
and to afford them, if it be in my power, more 
easy and ample means of judging in regard to 
the criticisms above named, than is afforded by 
any of the popular works now generally read. 

I must advertise my readers, that in order to do 
this, I cannot confine myself to a merely popular 



Importance of the Subject. 23 

exhibition of the evidence with regard to the 
words in question. Their importance in respect 
to the great subject of a future state, all must 
acknowledge who have any good acquaintance 
with the Scriptures. They form, indeed, the 
leading testimony in regard to the evidence which 
respects the duration of future punishment. But 
then, let it be remembered also, they are far from 
constituting the only testimony of the Scriptures 
in respect to this subject. I desire that this may 
be very explicitly understood. It is not my de- 
sign, for the present, to aim at adducing all the 
evidence relative to future punishment which the 
Scriptures afford, but only to examine one import- 
ant part of it ; and this, because it has of late 
been so often drawn into question. 

It will be easily seen by every intelligent reader, 
that I cannot appeal to the Scriptural usage of 
the words in such a way as to make the investi- 
gation a fundamental one, without a reference 
throughout to the original Scriptures. These are 
the only legitimate source of ultimate appeal, in 
all controverted subjects of religion. It is to 
these, indeed, that such of the advocates of uni- 
versal salvation as are able to do it, profess to 
make an appeal. I must, therefore, take the 
same ground ; and yet, while I do this, I would 



24 Alayv and Alcbviot;. 

hope to make myself intelligible in most cases to 
all well-educated readers, although they do not 
possess a knowledge of the original. A few 
things must, in an investigation like the present, 
necessarily be without the circle of their appre- 
hension. But I would fain hope, that this will 
not* detract from the general impression which 
the present chapter is designed to make. 



In pursuing the inquiry about the Scriptural 
meaning of alcov and alcovtoc, {forever and everlasl- 
ing), I propose to investigate the meaning of these 
words among profane Greek writers; their mean- 
ing in the New Testament; the meaning of the 
corresponding words in the Old Testament, which 
have been translated by them ; the meaning of 
these last words in the Septuagint; then to present 
a brief view of the bearing which the testimony 
exhibited in respect to these words has on the 
duration of future punishment; and lastly, to 
make some remarks on the abuse of these words, 
and on some mistaken criticisms with regard to 
them. 

1. CLASSICAL USE. 

Respecting this there can be little or no doubt. 
Alcbv means, (1) Length or space of time; and 



Classical Use. 25 

so, time of life, age of man, age considered as a 
space of time. (2) Long time, eternity, long in- 
definite space of time. There is a third unusual 
meaning sometimes attached to this word, viz. 
mark, which has no bearing on our present in- 
quiry, and seems to have arisen from a mistaken 
derivation of the word from did), to notice, to 
mark. 

The word olcbvto^, as defined by Passow, means 
long-continuing, everlasting, eternal; and with this 
Schneider agrees. 

Most of the shades of meaning which these 
words have in the classics, are also given to them 
in Scriptural usage ; and along with these, some 
others also which are peculiar to the writers of 
Hebrew-Greek. No one acquainted with the na- 
ture of this Greek, will wonder at this. A great 
proportion of the Greek words employed in the 
New Testament and the Septuagint, is used in a 
similar manner. Not only do they bear many 
senses foreign to classic usage, but many of them 
are employed in a manner wholly foreign to the 
Greek classical authors. If any one desires proof 
of this — overwhelming proof — he has only to in- 
spect a few pages of Schleusner, or of "WahPs 
Lexicon of the New Testament, which will solve 
all his doubts. 



26 Accov and AIwvioq. 



2. NEW TESTAMENT USE. 

On the meaning of the words in question, as 
employed by the writers of the New Testament, 
of course, depends substantially the issue of the 
question before us. I must beg my readers there- 
fore to have patience, and to bear with me while 
I endeavor to conduct them, step by step, through 
every instance in which the words are employed 
in the New Testament. 

There are shorter methods of dispatching the 
subject in hand; and these are, either to decide it 
by affirming positively in regard to it, and sub- 
stituting this for a labored process of proof; or 
by producing a few instances which may seem to 
support the theory advanced by any writer, and 
neglecting the rest; or, lastly, by conjecturing 
what the words in question ought to mean, instead 
of proving what they do mean. 

But, as I have engaged in the severe task of 
endeavoring to make a thorough examination, I 
cannot knowingly adopt either of these methods. 
I have endeavored to take a view of the whole 
ground for myself; and I am now desirous to 
submit the remits of this labor to the inspection 
of others, who are willing seriously and labo- 



Accov. 27 

riously to inquire what they ought to believe in 
respect to the momentous subject before us. 

If there be any future punishment, it belongs 
of course to a future state, i.e. to the invisible 
world. Our first inquiry, then, will naturally be, 
In what sense are the words aicou and ald)vto$ 
employed, when used with reference to the things of 
the invisible world? 

I omit all those cases in which these words are 
connected with the subject of punishment, for the 
present. 

I shall inquire, first of all, how they are em- 
ployed in regard to all other things belonging to 
the invisible world, i.e. to all other objects which 
exist there, or to transactions, occurrences, con- 
ditions, or circumstances, belonging to that world. 



ALQN. 

I. FIRST GENERAL CLASS OF MEANINGS. 

As the most common and appropriate meaning 
of al&Vy in the New Testament, and the one which 
best accords with the corresponding Hebrew word 
D 7lJ7, Holam (which the Septuagint nearly always 
renders by accov), and which therefore deserves 
the first rank in regard to order, I put down, 



28 Meaning of 

1. 

1. An indefinite period of time; time without 
limitation; ever, forever, time without end, eternity ; 
all in relation to the future. 

As to the various instances now to be cited, the 
reader will see that some one or other of these 
shades of meaning applies to all. If he be ac- 
customed to philological and exegetical studies, 
he will also perceive that, so far as the simple 
idea of the word is concerned, the sense of it is 
substantially the same, in all the cases now to be 
designated ; and that the different shades by which 
the word is rendered depend on the object with 
which it is associated, or to which it has a relation, 
rather than on any differences in the real meaning 
of olwv itself. The idea which this word pre- 
serves through the whole, is that of unlimited, 
indefinite time; which, in one case, in consequence 
of its connection, must be rendered ever (joined 
with a negative, never); in another, forever, etc., 
in all the various ways already mentioned above. 

To the following instances I now make the 
appeal, in confirmation of what has just been stated. 



(a) I begin with those which have reference to 
God (or to Christ), to what belongs to him, or is 
rendered or will be rendered to him, and which 



Ahbv. 29 

(from his nature and the nature of things) cannot 
be supposed ever to have an end, or ever to cease 
from existing, or from being rendered, etc. 

In the following five texts, the phrase ei<; robs 
accbvaz is translated forever, viz. : 

Rom. i. 25, the Creator, who is blessed for ever: 
surely, not merely for a period which is to have 
an end! 

Eom. ix. 5, God over all, blessed forever: plainly 
in the same sense as above. 

Rom. xi. 36, to whom be glory forever. 

Rom. xvi. 27, to the only wise God ... be 
glory forever. 

2 Cor. xi. 31, God . . , who is blessed forever. 

In 1 Pet. i. 25, the word of the Lord abideth 
forever, it is e?c rov altbva. 

In 2 Pet. iii. 18* to him [Christ] be glory both 
now and forever, vvv xac e/c 'faspav aiwvoz. 

In Eph. iii. 21, to him [God] be glory ... to 
all the generations of the age of ages or of eternity, 
too alwvoc, tcov ald)vo)v % i.e. to him be eternal glory. 
The form of expression is plainly intensive here. 

In the following fourteen texts it is ere robs 
alwvaz z(ov aicovcov. 

Gal. i. 5, to whom [God] be glory for ever and 
ever. 

Phil. iv. 20, to God ... be glory for ever and ever. 

3* 



30 Meaning of 

1 Tim. i. 17, to God ... be glory for ever and 
ever. 

2 Tim. iv. 18, to whom [to the Lord] be glory 
for ever and ever. 

Heb. xiii. 21, to him [God, or Christ] be glory 
for ever and ever. 

1 Pet. iv. 11, to whom [God, or Christ] be glory 
and praise for ever and ever. 

1 Pet. v. 11, to him [God] be glory and praise 
for ever and ever. 

Rev. i. 6, to him [God] be glory and praise for 
ever and ever. 

Eev. i. 18, and behold! I [Christ] live for ever 
and ever. 

Rev. iv. 9, glory and honour ... to him [God, 
or Christ], who liveth for ever and ever. 

Rev. iv. 10, they worshipped him [God, or 
Christ] who liveth for ever and ever. 

Rev. vii. 12, blessing and glory ... to our God 
for ever and ever. 

Rev. x. 6, [the angel] sware by him who liveth 
for ever and ever. 

Rev. xv. 7, vials filled with the wrath of God, 
who liveth for ever and ever. 



(b) The second class of texts under the present 
general head are those which have reference to 



Aldn>. 31 

the happiness of the pious, especially to their happi- 
ness in heaven or the future world. 

Of this tenor are the following, — viz. : 

John vi. 51, if any one eat of this bread, he 
shall live forever, e«c ?bv al(hva % i.e. he shall be 
happy always, without end. 

John vi. 58, the same expression, in the same 
sense. 

John viii. 51, if any one shall keep my word, 
he shall never see death, ou . . . eiz rbv ala>va' by 
which expression the never-ending happiness of 
the righteous is surely designated. 

John viii. 52, he shall never taste of death : 
the same words, in the same sense, as in the pre- 
ceding example. 

John x. 28, they shall never perish : the same, — 
where the endless happiness of the righteous is 
clearly asserted. 

John xi. 26, he that believeth in me shall never 
die : the same, to the same purpose, as the above 
example. 

2 Cor. ix. 9, his righteousness abideth forever: 
the same ; i.e. his charitable benevolence shall be 
eternally rewarded. 

1 John ii. 17, he who doeth the will of God 
shall abide forever, Btq rov al&va" i.e. he shall ever 
be secure and happy. 



32 Meaning of 

Rev. xxii. 5, they [the servants of God] shall 
reign for ever and ever, e/c Tobz al&vac, r&v alibvcov* 
i.e. shall occupy a station of exalted dignity and 
happiness forever. 



(c) Another application of alcov, in a sense that 
classes under our first general head, is, to designate 
a period unlimited or ivithout bounds, i.e. ever, and 
(with a negative) never. This is clear from the 
following examples ; in the first fourteen of which 
the phrase is e?c ?bv al&va, or, oux . . . ere rbv al&va. 

Matt. xxi. 19, let there be no fruit of thee for- 
ever, er'c tov alwva. The words have respect to 
the fig-tree which was cursed. That an unlimited 
— i.e. endless — period is here meant, seems very 
plain ; for it has respect to all future time. 

Mark xi. 14, the same words, in the same sense. 

John iv. 14, whoever shall drink of the water 
which I shall give him, shall never thirst ; a full 
negative, and for a period plainly without any 
limitation. This also might be referred to the 
class (6), above. 

John viii. 35, the servant abideth not forever, 
but the Son abideth forever. Here an unlimited 
period, a time that has no bounds, is plainly de- 
signated. 

John xii. 34, we have heard out of the law, 



Ald>\>. 33 

that Christ abideth forever. The passage expresses 
the opinion of the Jews in regard to the Messiah, 
who, they supposed, would be altogether exempt 
from death. Of course it here means an un- 
limited or endless period. 

John xiii. 8, thou shalt never wash my feet. 

John xiv. 16, that he [the Comforter] may abide 
with you forever. Here always, i.e. constantly 
and for an unlimited time, is plainly the idea 
conveyed. 

1 Cor. viii. 13, I will never eat flesh. 

Heb. v. 6, thou art a high priest forever, i.e. for 
a period unlimited, undefined, a very long period ; 
forever, while the nature of things shall permit 
or require this office. 

Heb. vi. 20, Jesus . . . made high priest for- 
ever: in the same sense as above. 

Heb. vii. 17, thou art a priest forever: in the 
same sense as before. 

Heb. vii. 21, the same expression, in the same 
sense. 

Heb. vii. 24, but he, because he remaineth [a 
priest] forever: in reference to the same subject 
as the three last examples above. 

Heb. vii. 28, but the word of the oath . . . 
maketh the Son [high priest], who is exalted to 
a state of glory forever. This might be ranked 



34 Meaning of 

under No 1, b; but I have chosen to arrange it 
here, in consequence of its intimate connection 
with the four preceding texts. _ 

2 John v. 2, [the truth] shall be with you 
always. 

In Mark iii. 29, it is, whoever shall blaspheme 
against the Holy Ghost shall never have forgive- 
ness, obx . . . e/c ?bv alwva. Comp. under No. 
4, a, Matt. xii. 32. 

Luke i. 33, he (Jesus) shall reign over the house 
of David forever, bIq tou^ al&vaq. There may be 
some difference of opinion here, as to the class 
of meanings to which this phrase is to be assigned. 
The majority of interpreters give to it the sense 
of forever, and appeal to the nature of the Mes- 
siah's kingdom, and also to the corresponding 
assertion in the latter part of v. 33, "of his king- 
dom there shall be no end/ 7 obx . . . reXo^. On 
the other hand, interpreters who construe it some- 
what differently, appeal to 1 Cor. xv. 24-28, in 
order to show that the kingdom of the Messiah 
is to have an end, and that therefore the expression 
in question is to be regarded only as designating 
an indefinite period, a very long time. They add, 
too, that the passage in Luke plainly has a rela- 
tion to the kingdom of Christ as Messiah ; a king- 
dom which must cease, of course, when the office 



Aiaiv. 35 

of Messiah ceases, which will be after the general 
judgment, 1 Cor. xv. 24-28. The reasoning of 
the latter seems to be weighty ; and I should feel 
bound to accede to it, unless it might be said, with 
propriety, that there is a spiritual kingdom, one 
purely of a moral kind and adapted to the hea- 
venly world, that will continue after the appro- 
priate reign of Jesus as Messiah shall cease. This 
is certainly favored by those passages in the New 
Testament, which ascribe endless dominion and 
power to the Son of God in the same manner as 
to the Father; e.g. 'Rev. v. 13, xi. 15; Heb. i. 8. 
On the whole, I am rather inclined to class e/c 
robe al&vac, here, with those passages which de- 
signate an unlimited period ; particularly because 
of the oux . . . riAoc, which follows in the same 
verse. Yet I should not be very confident in 
maintaining this classification, for the reasons 
stated above. 

If I am correct, the passage might be classed 
under (a) above. 

Luke i. 55, [God] remembered mercy to Abra- 
ham and his seed forever, eco^ alwvoz; i.e. he always, 
ever has remembered, and ever will remember, 
mercy to Abraham and his seed; he is unchange- 
ably and perpetually propitious to them. This 
text might be referred, also, to the class (b) above. 



36 Meaning of 

Heb. i. 8, thy throne, O God, is for ever and 
ever y giq zbv alwva zoo al&voQ. The idea which 
this expresses, seems to be the same as that in 
Luke i. 33 above, which see. It may be re- 
marked here, in confirmation of what will be said 
by-and-by about the use of the singular and plural 
number, that el$ zbv alwva zoo al&voc, differs not 
at all, in sense, from el<; zob<z al&vaq z&v accovcov. 

Heb. xiii. 8, Jesus Christ the same yesterday, 
to-day, and forever, e/c robs al&vac; i.e. Jesus Christ 
invariably, always the same. 

Rev. v. 12, to Him that sitteth on the throne, 
and to the lamb, be . . . glory and power for 
ever and ever, eis roue ac&vaz z&v accovcov. This 
might be ranged under (a) above. 

Rev. xi. 15, he [Christ] shall reign for ever and 
ever, ei?c tooz alcovac, z&v accovcov. See on Luke i. 
33 above. 



2. 

Thus far all the examples which have been 
cited refer to future time. But there is an- 
other small class of examples, in which accov refers 
to past time, and which require a distinct head 
of enumeration. They are of a nature kindred 
with the various species of meaning already men- 
tioned under No. 1, a, b, c; and therefore I shall 



Accov. 37 

designate them here as belonging to No. 2, under 
the general arrangement. I observe, then, 

(2.) That alwv sometimes means an indefinite or 
long period in time past, ancient days, times of old, 
long ago, always in time past, generations or ages 
long since. 

Of this tenor are the following passages, — viz. : 

Luke i. 70, as he [God] promised by the mouth 
of his holy prophets in ancient times, or of his 
holy prophets long ago, &n ala>vo<z. 

Acts xv. 18, known unto God of old, an' aicovos, 
are all his works ; i.e. God knew all his w T orks 
from the most ancient times, or always in times 
past. 

1 Cor. ii. 7, which God decreed long ago, or 
ages since, npb zwv alwvcov i.e. from eternity. 

Eph. iii. 9, the mystery hidden in God from 
ages, dub zwv acaivcow i.e. hidden during all ages 
past, or always hidden during ages past. 

Eph. iii. 11, according to the purpose of ages 9 
zwv alcbvcov i.e. according to the ancient or eter- 
nal purpose. 

Col. i. 26, the mystery hidden from ages, dnb 
zwv ald>vo)W in the same sense as Eph. iii. 9, above. 

Under this head also should be classed John ix. 
32, never was it heard, ex zoo alcovoc, obx ijxo6a§rj, 
that one opened the eyes of him that was born 

4 



38 Meaning of 

blind ; i.e. during all ages past, or from the most 
ancient time, such a thing has not been heard of. 



3. 

The cases which I shall next rank under No. 3 
may not appear, at first view, to be very nearly 
related to those already exhibited. But the ex- 
perienced interpreter will easily perceive that there 
is in them a tacit reference to the idea of age, 
period of time, seculum; and, also, that this has 
particular reference to quantity of time as a whole, 
and may relate either to a past or a future age. 
In accordance with this, then, we may say, 

(3.) That acaiv occasionally means age in the 
sense of dispensation, — viz., age (Jewish), age 
(Christian). 

In this case, it is obviously employed as we 
employ the word age in English, when we speak 
of the patriarchal age, the antediluvian age, etc. 
Of this meaning may be found the following ex- 
amples, — viz. : 

1 Cor. x. 11, on whom the ends of the age (ages) 
have come, z&v accovcov i.e. who live at the close 
of the Jewish age or dispensation. 

Eph. ii. 7, that he might show in the ages to 
come, iv to7$ alcoac ro?c iTrepftojusvoaz, the exceed- 
ing riches of his grace. This may be construed 



Alcbv. 39 

of the [gospel] ages; or it may be taken in the 
general sense of secula. The former is consonant 
with New Testament usage; but the latter is, 
perhaps, the more probable sense. 

Heb. vi. 5, who have tasted the good promise 
of God and the powers of the age to come, fieXXovzot; 
aiwvoc i.e. of the miraculous powers bestowed 
under the gospel dispensation. 

These are all the examples which occur, that 
require to be ranked under this head; and of 
these, Eph. ii. 7 might be ranked under another 
category, and considered merely as an example 
of the classical sense of accov, — viz., seculum, cevum, 
age simply considered. 

It will be perceived that most of the meanings 
under the preceding heads are in accordance with 
those which the word not unfrequently has in 
the Greek classic writers. In this respect, how- 
ever, the New Testament usage differs from the 
classical one, — viz., in that in the New Testament 
it most usually means an indefinite, unlimited 
period of time ; whereas in the classics the sense 
of cevum, seculum, age, generation (in respect to 
time), appears to be its more usual meaning 

II. SECOND GENEEAL CLASS OF MEANINGS. 

I come now to a secondary and peculiar use of 



40 Meaning of 

the word in question; one altogether different 
from any thing in the Greek classics, and derived, 
as it would seem, entirely from the Hebrew usage 
of the word □ /ijf, Holam, which the Seventy 
have translated so uniformly by alcov. 

In the ancient Hebrew Scriptures, the word 
Holam properly means eternity ; as I shall have 
occasion by-and-by to show. Like alcov, also, it is 
frequently applied to designate an indefinite period 
of time, which is spoken of in reference to a great 
variety of objects, and with shades of difference, 
like those which have been named in regard to 
the use of alcov. But the sense of world , the present 
world and the future world (when connected with 
rtfiTt this and K3H that which is to come), is one 
which does not appear ever to have been attached 
to Holam by the most ancient Hebrew writers ; 
nor is it found in the Hebrew Scriptures, unless 
it be in Ecc. iii. 11, which is so doubful, and so 
much disputed, that no philological conclusions 
can be safely deduced from it. 

In the later Hebrew, however (i.e. the Talmu- 
dic and Rabbinic), the word is employed, in innu- 
merable instances, in the sense of world; and 
this, either as present world or future world. From 
this usage in the later Hebrew (yet not so late but 
that it preceded the time when the New Testa- 



Aldv. 41 

ment was written), it conies, that alcov, in the New 
Testament, is not ^infrequently employed in a 
similar manner. 

No one, who is at all acquainted with*the 
multitude of Hebrew meanings attached to Greek 
words, both in the Septuagint and in the New 
Testament, will feel any surprise at this, or hesi- 
tate a moment about admitting the possibility or 
the reality of it. Hence we may assign to alcbv 
another meaning different from any above given, 
— viz. : 

(4.) The meaning, world; also present world, 
and future world, when such qualifying words are 
joined with it as show that it refers to the one 
or the other. 

(a) It is sometimes employed to denote the 
present world and future world, with special refer- 
ence to time or duration, — i.e. the period of their 
existence, or of one's existence in them. Of this 
character is the word in question in the following 
passages, — viz. : 

Matt. xii. 32, [the man who has uttered blas- 
phemy against the Holy Ghost] shall not be for- 
given, neither in this world, nor in that which is to 
come, ours iv toutw tcIj alcove, oure iv tw fiilXovu 

4* 



42 Meaning of 

[active] ; i.e. he shall not be forgiven during his 
continuance in the present world, nor in that 
which is to come; an affirmation plainly added 
by #ay of intensity, in order to strengthen the 
declaration, forgiveness shall not be extended to 
him, which immediately precedes. 

Mark x. 30, [the man who has forsaken all 
that he might follow Christ] shall receive a hun- 
dredfold in the present time, iv tw xacpw tout at, 
and eternal life in the world to come, iv tw active 
tw ipyopkvw. Here activ is used for world, with 
special reference to the period of its duration; as 
is plain from its being placed in antithesis with 
xacpep TOUTco. This might be translated age, and 
ranked under No. 3, but with a classical sense 
like that of Eph. ii. 7. 

Luke xviii. 30, the same words, in the same 
sense. ^ 

On the whole, all the instances here under (a) 
might be rendered in the same classical way, and 
make a sense well fitted for the passages in which 
they stand. If any one prefers this method, I 
shall not object against it. Thus construed, all 
these texts, with that of Eph. ii. 7, must be con- 
sidered as examples of the more common classical 
sense of activ. 



Acoiv. 43 

(b) Ac civ is sometimes employed to denote the 
world with all its cares, or business, or temptations, 
or allurements to sin. Just so we often employ it 
in the English language. A man of the world is 
a man devoted to the cares or pleasures of the 
world. In a like sense the later Hebrew D /1JJ 
was often employed. 

The examples of such a sense are as follows, 
— viz. : 

Matt. xiii. 22, the cares of this world, zoo 
accovoz toutou . . . choke the word; i.e. worldly 
business, occupation, engagements, stifle the im- 
pressions which religious truth had made. 

Mark iv. 19, the same expression, in the same 
sense. 

Luke xvi. 8, the children of this world are 
wiser in their generation, etc. 

Luke xx. 34, the children of this world marry, 
etc. ; i.e. worldly men, men devoted to worldly 
pursuits, etc. 

Rom. xii. 2, be not conformed to this icorld, r<p 
acwvc to'jtoj- i.e. to the sinful pursuits and plea- 
sures of this world. 

1 Cor. i.20, where is the disputer of this world? 
i.e. the worldly disputer, one who disputes after 
the manner of men of the world. 

1 Cor. ii. 6, but not the wisdom of this world; 



44 Meaning of 

i.e. not the wisdom of worldly men; nor of 
the princes of this world; i.e. of worldly-minded 
princes. 

1 Cor. ii. 8, which none of the princes of this 
world knew ; i.e. which no worldly-minded princes 
knew. 

2 Cor. iv. 4, whom the god of this world hath 
blinded ; i.e. whom Satan, who reigns in worldly 
men, hath blinded. 

Gal. i. 4, that he might select us from the pre- 
sent evil world. 

2 Tim. iv. 10, Demas hath forsaken us, having 
loved the present world, 

Tit. ii. 12, let us live soberly and righteously 
and godly in the present world, iv zip vuv accovv 
where the antithesis shows that the world of 
temptation and trial is meant. 



(c) From the preceding use of aicov it comes that 
the word is sometimes employed simply to denote 
the world itself as an object or as an actual exist- 
ence, i.e. simply mundus, xoa/uoz, and this, either 
present or future. Of this the following seem to 
be evident examples, — viz. : 

Matt. xiii. 40, so shall it be in the end of this 
world, iv T7j oovzeXeia zoo olwvoc, toutoit i.e. when 
the final consummation of all things shall take 



Al<i>v. 45 

place, and the world comes to an end or is de- 
stroyed. 

Matt. xiii. 49, the same words, in the same 
sense. 

Matt. xxiv. 3, what shall be the sign of thy 
coming/ and of the end of the world f riyc govtz- 
hia<; zou alajvot;, which (as the phrase was used 
here by the disciples) seems probably to mean 
end of the world in a sense like that of the two 
preceding instances. 

Matt, xxviii. 20, I am with you always, unto 
the end of the world; a clear case of the same 
meaning with the preceding words, as iz&oac, rag 
fjfiepat;, always, plainly shows. 

In Matthew it appears that the usage of alcbv 
almost throughout (in passages where the reading 
is not doubtful) is in accordance with the later 
usage of the Hebrew in respect to the word D /i^. 
What influence this may have on the critical 
questions, Whether Matthew wrote his Gospel in 
Hebrew? and, of course, Whether the present 
Greek is only a translation ? I cannot stop here 
to inquire; but critical readers will not fail to 
note the circumstance to which I have now 
adverted. 

Luke xx. 35, they who are counted worthy to 
obtain that world, rou al&vos ixeivou* viz. the future 



46 Meaning of 

world, in distinction from alcovo^ toutou in the 
preceding verse, or in opposition to it. 

1 Cor. iii. 18, if any man thinketh to be wise 
among you in this world, Iv rep alcove zourco. In 
the next verse, xbafioc, is put for alcov. This 
example might perhaps be referred to No. 4, b, 
and be taken in this sense, — viz. : if any worldly- 
minded man among you, etc. 

Eph. i. 21, above every name . . . in this world, 
and in that which is to come, ev rep alcove rouzcp, 
aXXa xal iv zcp [alcove] /ueXXovze. This, some may 
suppose, might be put under No. 4, a; but it does 
not appear that a special relation to time is here 
designated. 

1 Tim. i. 17, now to the king of the world 
(worlds), zcov alcovcov i.e. the king of the earth, 
or the king of the universe. So in the Old Tes- 
tament, Ps. xlvii. T) God is king of all the earth. 
Zech. xiv. 9, the Lord shall be Icing over all the 
earth; and so, in innumerable places, God is styled 
king, king of Israel, etc. That the plural number 
{alcovcov) is here employed, makes no difference in 
the signification; as appears from Heb. i. 2, xi. 3. 
The same usage is extended to many other words ; 
e.g. jStl'p tabernacle and D'JSEJ'p, tabernacles, 

7<tt God and O^fl/K God, DJ sea and D*Q* seas, 
oupavoz heaven and obpavoi heavens, aaftfiazov sab- 



Aicbv. 47 

bath and adfiftaza sabbaths, etc. ; which (although 
I have translated some of them in the singular and 
some in the plural) are indiscriminately employed 
in both numbers, by the sacred writers. Almvmv 
then may mean here, as in Heb. i. 2, xi. 3, world; 
or in all these cases it may be rendered worlds, if 
any one should prefer this. But I am not aware that 
the Hebrews applied the words D/)tf and almv 
to designate any of the planets except the earth. 
If so, then the 'plural number here is to be ren- 
dered in conformity with the usage above inti- 
mated; just as yitt terra and fi^JTTit terrce, D71Jf 

mundus and il'IDTI^ mundi, are promiscuously 
used, not unfrequently in one and the same sense. 

The objection to construing alwvcov here -as 
meaning ages, is, that the idea of eternity or im- 
mortality (which would thus be designated by it) is 
expressed by the very next word which follows, viz., 
dy&dpzcp, incorruptible, imperishable, immortal. 

1 Tim. vi. 17, charge them that are rich in the 
present world, ip zw pup al&vt. Without any 
violence, this might be referred also to the class 
b, which precedes the present head. 

Heb. i. 2, by whom also he made the tvorld 
(worlds), zobz aiwpoz. See on 1 Tim. i. 17 above, 
in regard to the use of the plural here. 



48 Meaning of 

Heb. xi. 3, by faith we perceive that the world 
(worlds, rob<z al&va^) was created by the word of 
God. See as above. 

Nearly all of the above instances are very clear 
and striking examples of the purely Hebraistic 
sense of the word alcov, as sometimes employed 
by the writers of the New Testament. 

To the meanings above specified I now subjoin 
one which is peculiar, and one, I may add, which 
is of so doubtful a nature that no philological 
conclusions can be safely deduced from it. 



in. 

(5.) As *in, in Hebrew, means generation of 
men, considered either as to the time in which they 
live, or as to the persons themselves, so aiaiv, in 
one case, seems, like this word, to have the mean- 
ing of generation, i.e. race, progeny, a class of men 
in existence. 

Of this peculiar meaning the following appears 
to be an example, — viz. : 

Eph. ii. 2, in which [trespasses] ye walked, in 
accordance with the generation of this world, xazd 
rbv alajva zoo xoa/uou toutow i.e. according to the 
course pursued by men of this world. The idea 



Alibv. 49 

is heightened by the writer's adding immediately, 
" According to the prince of the dominion of the 
air ; w i.e. in accordance with the designs of Satan, 
w T ho, being supposed by the Jews to dwell in the 
air, was called the prince of the air. 

One is almost tempted, here, to adopt the trans- 
lation Aeon, an evil spirit presiding over the wicked 
world, and called, in the next clause, the prince 
of the dominion of the air. But the uncertainty 
whether the Gnostic philosophy had yet intro- 
duced its speculations about Aeons (Al&ves), and 
particularly whether this term, in such a sense, 
was known to any of the writers of the New Tes- 
tament, seems to forbid such a rendering of al&va 
here. I cannot help thinking, that it is safer to 
build on the analogy which the Hebrew ^r\ af- 
fords, and which makes a sense apposite to the 
subject. 



IV. INSTANCES OF alwV IN BESPECT TO FUTURE 
PUNISHMENT. 

(6.) Under a distinct head, also, I will now 
arrange the cases which have reference to the 
punishment of the wicked. 

I do not expect the reader to pronounce judg- 
ment on this part of the subject here. I have 



50 Meaning of 

made the present arrangement only for convenience' 
sake, not designing either to anticipate a judg- 
ment in regard to its meaning in this connection, 
or to forestall the opinion of the reader. His 
judgment may be suspended, for the present, on 
this class of texts; and he may regard them 
here simply as a record of facts, i.e. of expressions 
actually occurring in the New Testament. 

2 Pet. ii. 17, to whom [to transgressors] is re- 
served the blackness of darkness forever, g*c ai&va. 

Jude 13, for whom [for the wicked] the black- 
ness of darkness is reserved for ever, e/c rov al&va. 

Rev. xiv. 11, the smoke of their torment [the 
torment of those who worship the beast] shall 
ascend up for ever and ever, sr'c al5>va<; alwv&v. 

Rev. xix. 3, and the smoke of her [of Babylon 
the mother of abominations] ascendeth up for ever 
and ever, ei<; robs alwva<; za>v aloyvcov. 

Rev. xx. 10, and they [the devil, the beast, and 
the false prophet] shall be tormented continually, 
for ever and ever, e/c rou<T alcovaz rG>v alibvov. 



These are all the instances of alcov which are 
found in the New Testament, where the genuine- 
ness of the text is unquestionable. All the cases 
of a questionable nature I have purposely omitted. 



Alalv. 51 

They cannot be built upon with safety ; and dis- 
pute about the genuineness of any particular texts 
would be quite foreign to my present design. I 
therefore omit the instances in Matt. vi. 13, Rev. 
v. 14, which are rejected by Knapp as spurious ; 
and also the instances in Acts iii. 21, Eph. i. 12, 
1 Pet. i. 23, which are considered and marked by 
him as dubious. 



GENERAL SUMMARY OF THE MEANINGS OF at WD. 

The result of the preceding investigation (ex- 
cepting the cases of doubtful readings) is as fol- 
lows, — viz. : 

The whole number of instances in which the 
word is employed, amounts to ninety-five. 

Of these, sixteen are used in the ascriptions of 
praise, glory, honor, blessing, etc. to God and 
Christ ; and in regard to these, there can be no 
rational doubt that it designates a period unlimited 
or never-ending. 

Equally certain is the same meaning, in the five 
cases in which it is applied to God, or to Christ, 
who liveth forever. 

In four cases, it is employed in designating the 
dominion of Christ, — viz. : Luke i. 33 ; Heb. i. 8 ; 
Rev. v. 13, and Rev. xi. 15. But the meaning 



52 Summary of the Meanings of 

here may be called in question. See on Luke i. 
33, above, p. 34. As to Rev. v. 13, I have ren- 
dered the word xpdvoz, power, Hebrew jjf: but as 
fy appears in a few cases to mean praise, honor, 
some may insist on that sense being given to 
xpdroz here. If they should do so, this will not 
alter the meaning of the alcov which follows, 
because it stands connected with the glory given to 
God, as well as to Christ, and therefore it plainly 
means a time unlimited. The text in Rev. xi. 15 
seems to ascribe dominion to Christ in the same 
sense as Luke i. 33, Heb. i. 8 ; and it may there- 
fore be questioned by some, whether eternal domi- 
nion be here meant. 

In one case, 1 Pet. i. 25, it is said of the word 
of God, that it abideth forever ; which plainly 
means that it will always be accomplished, or 
always remain stable, certain. 

In nine cases, it is applied to the future hap- 
piness of the saints. 

In eighteen cases, it designates the sense of ever 
(with a negative), never, always, without end, etc. ; 
and in a great majority of these cases, it is applied 
to something which Christ is, or does. 

In seven cases, it is applied to designate an in- 
definite period in ages past, ages long ago, very 
ancient times. 



Accop. 53 

In three cases, it is applied to designate age in 
the sense of dispensation, either Christian or Jewish. 
But one of these is susceptible of another inter- 
pretation. 

In three cases, it seems to designate the world 
present or future, considered with special reference 
to a period of duration, i.e. with the adsignifica- 
tion of continuance. 

In twelve cases, it designates the world, as the 
scene or place of cares, trials, enticements to 
sin, etc. 

In eleven cases, it seems to designate, more 
simply, the world present or future, considered 
merely as a place of residence for men, as an ob- 
ject of real existence, etc. 

In one case, Eph. ii. 2, it seems to be equivalent 
to the Hebrew word TH, and to designate the 
idea of generation, homines soeculi hujus, genus 
hominum. 

In five cases, it is applied to the subject of 
future punishment. 

In comparing these cases together, it appears 
that those which have a simple respect to time, 
•i.e. to time future, are employed in the sense of 
unlimited time, indefinite time, ever, always, forever, 
etc. Of this number are forty-nine, besides the 
five cases which relate to future punishment, 

5* 



54 Summary of the Meanings of 

and the four which relate to the Messiah's king- 
dom. 

Only seven cases have relation to time past; and 
these designate either a period from eternity, or 
ages long ago, very ancient times. 

The four cases which relate to the dominion of 
Christ may be understood variously by different 
interpreters who disagree about his nature or his 
dominioiic The passages are noted above. At 
least, these cases must designate a future indefinite 
period. 

All the other cases of alayv (of which there are 
thirty) may be classed under the general signifi- 
cation of the Hebrew word D/IJf (as employed 

in the Talmudic and Rabbinic Hebrew), viz., 
world in some sense or other, either present or 
future, Jewish or Christian. Of these, there are 
four shades of meaning, — viz., world, in reference 
to the period of time which it comprises, of which 
there are three cases ; or world, in reference to its 
cares, pleasures, enticements, etc., of which there 
are twelve cases ; or world as a place of abode, an 
existing, real object, etc., of which there are eleven 
cases ; or, finally, world Jewish or Christian, i.e. 
dispensation, of which there are three cases. I 
leave Eph. ii. 2 out of the account here, as the 
instance is so peculiar. 



AlAv. 55 

We come then, by virtue of this examination, 
to the conclusion that whenever alwv is employed 
for the purpose merely of designating future time, 
as a period of duration, it designates an indefinite 
unlimited time in all cases (those of future punish- 
ment being for the present excepted). In nearly 
all, it designates a period in the most absolute and 
extensive sense unlimited; as in the forty-nine cases 
mentioned above, independently of those which 
have relation to future punishment, and those 
which relate to the Messiah's kingdom. 

The use of alwv in order to designate past time 
is infrequent in the New Testament, as the above 
examples show ; there being only seven cases in 
the whole. Of these, six relate clearly to an in- 
definite, unlimited period in ages past; i.e. they sig- 
nify eternity a parte ante, as the elder theological 
writers were wont to call it. Of this tenor most 
clearly are Acts xv. 18 ; 1 Cor. ii. 7 ; Eph. iii. 9, 
iii. 11 ; Col. L 26. See above, under signification 
No. 2, In one case only, it means long ago, in 
ancient times simply, — viz., in Luke i. 80 ; in one 
case, with the negative, John ix. 32, it means 
never. 

We have, then, at least fifty -five instances in 
the New Testament in which it certainly means 
an unlimited period of duration either future or 



56 Summary of the Meanings of 

past, ever, always; omitting the eases in which it 
respects future punishment, and those which have 
regard to the dominion of the Messiah. If these 
be included, we have sixty-four cases (out of the 
whole ninety-four which occur) in which it means 
unlimited period, boundless duration. 

Unless we except Luke i. 70 (which, however, 
can hardly be excepted, it being a clear case of 
employing aicov in a manner designating an in- 
definite kind of period), there is no case in which 
it is employed in order to designate simply a 
definite, limited period, in all the New Testament; 
I mean, there is no case of this nature, where 
aicov is employed with the intention of conveying 
the simple idea of duration, or time during which 
any thing shall continue to exist or to be done. The 
New Testament writers employ fjkcxla and yeved 
to designate simply the age or period of men's 
lives. In no case is aicov employed by them sim- 
ply in this sense ; or at most, we can except only 
Eph. ii. 7. 

It is clear, then, that whenever aicov simply 
marks time in the New Testament, it marks in- 
definite, unlimited time, and such only. In some 
very few cases, there are circumstances accom- 
panying the use of it which show that eternity, 
in the absolute and simple sense of the word, 



Alwv. 57 

cannot be intended. But an overwhelming ma- 
jority of cases designate eternity a parte post (as 
the technical expression is), i.e. a future period 
without any limits or bounds. 

In regard to the other sense of alwv (i.e. its 
meaning when it is not primarily designed to 
mark time), it is plainly derived, as has been 
shown above (p. 40 seq.), from the later Hebrew 
0;)]?, in the sense of world; and it is employed 
merely to designate this, with the adsignifications 
of continuance, or of cares, business, pleasures, etc. ; 
or else to designate world simply as a place of 
residence, action, etc., or world Christian or Jew- 
ish. All these meanings are obviously foreign to 
the question about future punishment: with the 
exception of those, however, which speak of the 
future world, the world to come, as the abode of 
sinners in their state of retribution. Of these, 
more hereafter. 

We are now prepared to advance to the investi- 
gation of the second word in question, alcbvtoq. 



AMNIOS. 



This is plainly a derivate of alcov, according to 
the common laws of the Greek language. The 



58 Meaning of 

question of course will now come up, Whether 
the adjective corresponds in meaning throughout 
with accov, the substantive? 

The classical sense of this word, as given by 
Passow, is long-continued, everlasting, eternal; all, 
of course, designating an indefinite or unlimited 
period, and agreeing with the meaning of aic6v, 
in all those cases which have a simple relation to 
time. 

The ancient Hebrew has no corresponding 

adjective here; but it employs the noun D/1]^ in 
the' place of one, as is usual in a multitude of 
cases with this ancient language. But the later 
Talmudic and Rabbinic Hebrew employs an 
adjective formed from D71Jf (j us t as the Greek 
alwvtoc, is derived from alcbv), in the sense of per- 
petuus, eternus, sempiternus, perpetual, eternal } 
everlasting. The adjective is *pyi#. It is some- 
what remarkable, also, that although only the 
later Hebrew employs Holam in the sense of world, 
as above described, yet this same Hebrew, which 
alone employs the adjective, never uses it in the 
sense of worldly, etc., but only in the sense of eter- 
nal, everlasting. 

We shall see that in this respect, also, the Greek 
adjective corresponds, in the New Testament, 



Aicovto^. 59 

almost uniformly with the Hebrew adjective; and 
that all the uses of alcbvtoc, correspond with the 
first class of significations which aldyv bears, and 
not with the Hebrew- Greek meaning of it. 



We come now to the usage of the word, as 
exhibited in the New Testament, 

Meaning of Aiciwoz. 

FIRST GEKERAL CLASS OF MEANIKGS. 

(1.) It signifies perpetvxd, never-ending, eternal. 

(a) It is so employed, in regard to the happi- 
ness of the righteous, in the following texts, in con- 
nection with ^corj, ^o)7] alajvco^. 

Matt xix. 16, what good thing shall I do, that 
I may inherit eternal lifef 

Matt. xix. 29, whoever shall forsake houses, or 
brethren, ... for my sake, shall receive . . . eternal 
life. 

Matt. xxv. 46, but the righteous [shall go away] 
into everlasting life. 

Mark x. 17, the same as Matt. xix. 16 above, 

Mark x. 30, the same as Matt. xix. 29 above. 

Luke x. 25, like the case in Matt. xix. 16 above. 

Luke xviii. 18, the same as Matt. xix. 16 above. 



60 Meaning of 

Luke xviii. 30, the same as Matt. xix. 29 above, 

John iii. 15, he that belie veth on him [Christ] 
. • . shall have eternal life. 

John iii. 16, that whosoever belie veth on him 
[Christ] . . . should have eternal life. 

John iii. 36, he who believeth on the Son hath 
eternal life. 

John iv. 14, it shall be in him a well of water 
springing up into everlasting life, 

John iv. 36, he shall gather fruit to eternal life. 

John v. 24, he who believeth on him that sent 
me, hath eternal life. 

John v. 39, by them ye think ye have eternal 
life. 

John vi. 27, labor for the meat which endureth 
to eternal life. 

John vi. 40, he who believeth on him [Christ] 
shall have everlasting life. 

John vi. 47, he who believeth on me [Christ] 
hath everlasting life. 

John vi. 54, he who drinketh my blood hath 
eternal life. 

John vi. 68, thou hast the words of eternal life. 

John x. 28, I give eternal life to them. 

John xii. 25, he who hateth his present life 
shall preserve it [his soul] for eternal life. 

John xii. 50, 1 know that his commandment is 



Al(hvio$. 61 

eternal life; i.e. the keeping of his commandment 
leads to eternal happiness. 

John xvii. 2, that he [Jesus] might give to them 
[his disciples] eternal life. 

John xvii. 3, this is eternal life. 

Acts xiii. 46, ye have judged yourselves to be 
unworthy of eternal life. 

Acts xiii. 48, and as many believed as were 
ordained to eternal life. 

Rom. ii. 7, to them . . . who seek for glory . . . 
[God will give] eternal life. 

Rom. v. 21, so shall grace reign . . . unto eternal 
life. 

Rom. vi. 22, ye have the end [of obedience], 
eternal life. 

Rom. vi. 23, the gift of God is eternal life. 

Gal. vi. 8, he who soweth to the Spirit shall 
of the Spirit reap life everlasting. 

1 Tim. i. 16, an example for those who should 
believe in him unto eternal life. 

1 Tim vi. 12, lay hold on eternal life. 

Tit. i. 1, in hope of eternal life. 

Tit. iii. 7, that we might be heirs according to 
the hope of eternal life. 

1 John ii. 25, he hath promised to us eternal 
life. 

1 John iii. 15, no murderer hath eternal life. 



62 Meaning of 

1 John v. 11, God hath given to us eternal life, 
1 John v, 13, those who believe have eternal 
life. 

1 John v. 20, the same is the true God and 
eternal life. 

Jude 21, expecting the mercy of our Lord Jesus 
Christ, unto eternal life. 

Luke xvi. 9, that when ye fail [die] 5 ye may 
be received into eternal mansions, ei<; r«c alavlouz 
oxqva<; % i.e. into eternal abodes of happiness comp. 
John xiv. 2. 

2 Cor. iv. 17, a far more exceeding and eternal 
weight of glory, alcbvtov ftdpot; dofyz. 

2 Tim. ii. 10, with eternal glory, ptevd dogyz al- 

COPCOO. 

1 Pet. v. 10, God . . . who called us unto his 
eternal glory, er'c ttjv alcovcov abroo 36% av. 

2 Thess. ii. 16, God . . . who hath loved us and 
given us eternal consolation, alcovtov napdxtyatv. 

Heb. v. 9, he became the author of eternal sal- 
vation, ocozYjpiaz alcoviou. 

Heb. ix. 12, he obtained eternal redemption for 
us, alcbvtov lorpcoacv. 

Heb. ix. 15, that they who are chosen might 
receive the eternal inheritance, ttjq alcoviou x/ypovo- 
pi'taq. 



Alwvcos. 63 

2 Pet. i. 11, an entrance into the eternal king- 
dom, etc TTjv alcovtov ftaadelav. 



(b) The next class of cases are those which have 
respect to God or his glory. 

Kom. xvi. 26, according to the commandment 
of the eternal God, tou alaivioo &eoo. 

1 Tim. vi. 16, to whom [to God] be honor and 
everlasting praise, xpdroQ alcoviov. 



(c) There are a few solitary and miscellaneous 
cases, which I shall arrange under one head. 

2 Cor. iv. 18, the things which are not seen 
are eternal. 

2 Cor. v. 1, we have a habitation not made with 
hands, eternal in the heavens. This might be 
arranged under (a) above. 

In Heb. ix. 14, it is applied to the Spirit (either 
of Christ or of God) : who by an eternal Spirit 
offered up himself, etc. 

Heb. xiii. 20, the blood of an everlasting cove- 
nant; ix. of a covenant never to be changed or 
abrogated. 



64 Meaning of 

1 John i. 2, we declare unto you the eternal life, 
— viz. : Jesus the author of eternal life. 

Rev. xiv. 6, an angel . . . having the everlasting 
gospel. 

In Philemon 15, alcoviov is used adverbially, 
in the sense of forever , always. 



SECOND GENERAL CLASS OF MEANINGS. 

(2.) In three cases, the word aldivioc, seems to 
bear a sense kindred to that of alcbv under No. 2, 
above, — viz. : ancient, long since, very early, re- 
mote. 

The following are the examples of this sort, — 
viz. : 

Rom. xvi. 25, the revelation of the mystery, 
which was kept in silence in ancient ages, ipbvoiz 
cdcovioi^ i.e. during all preceding ages, or, always 
hitherto, from eternity. 

2 Tim. i. 9, according to his own purpose, and 
the grace given us through Jesus Christ, before 
the ancient ages, npb y^pbvtov alawicov i.e. before 
the primitive ages, which means, before the world 
began, from eternity. Thus, in John vii. 5, the 
glory which I had with thee, before the world was, 
obviously means, from eternity. So our English 



AltovtoQ. 65 

version, in 2 Tim. i. 9, before the world began, npb 
*£pbvcov alcovicov, which is also repeated in Tit. i. 
2, where the Greek expression is the same as here. 

Tit. i. 2, eternal life, which God, who cannot 
lie, promised before the ancient ages: the same ex- 
pression, evidently in the same sense, as the phrase 
above. 

These are all the instances in the New Tes- 
tament, which have relation to past time ; and 
these, it is very evident, have an intimate con- 
nection with the use of aicov in No. 2, above. 

There remain, — 

(3.) INSTANCES IN KESPECT TO FUTURE PUNISH- 
MENT. 

Matt, xviii. 8, it is better for thee to enter into 
life lame or maimed, than having two hands to 
be cast into eternal fire, ere ?b nop to alcovtov. 

Matt. xxv. 41, depart from me, ye cursed, into 
everlasting fire, etc ?b xvp to alwvtov. 

Matt. xxv. 46, these shall go away into ever- 
lasting punishment, bIq xblaatv alcbvtov [but the 
righteous into everlasting life, ecz'^coyv aicowov]. 

Mark iii. 29, whoever shall utter blasphemy 
against the Holy Spirit, shall never obtain for- 
giveness, but be obnoxious to eternal condemna- 
tion, cuwwou xpiaea)£. 

6* 



66 Meaning of 

2 Thess. i. 9, who shall be punished with ever- 
lasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, 
oted-pov alcovtov. 

Heb. vi. 2, not again imparting elementary in- 
struction with respect to repentance . . . and eter- 
nal judgment ; i.e. eternal condemnation or punish- 
ment, aiwvioo xpiaecoc;. 

Jude 6, suffering the punishment of eternal fire, 

TTUpOZ atCDVLOD. 

I leave these cases without remark for the 
present, reserving my conclusions until I have 
made some additional remarks. 

GENERAL SUMMARY OF THE MEANINGS OF 

al(l)WOQ m 

It appears from the above representation that 
there are sixty-six cases in which altbvtoc, is em- 
ployed in the New Testament. Of these, fifty- 
one are used in relation to the happiness of the 
righteous ; two, in relation to God or to his glory ; 
six are of a miscellaneous nature, but the mean- 
ing in them all is quite clear ; and seven relate to 
the subject of future punishment. 

In regard to all the cases which have a relation 
to future time, it is quite plain and certain that 
they designate an endless period, an unlimited du- 
ration. I except of course, for the present, those 



Atdwoc. 67 

seven cases which have respect to future punish- 
ment. But in regard to the rest, if they have 
not the meaning which has just been stated, then 
the Scriptures do not decide that God is eternal, 
nor that the happiness of the righteous is without 
end, nor that his covenant of grace will always 
remain; a conclusion which would forever blast 
the hopes of Christians, and shroud in more than 
midnight darkness all the glories of the gospel. 

The above are all the instances in which alcovtoQ 
is employed in the New Testament ; with the ex- 
ception of 1 Tim. vi. 19, where the reading can- 
not be satisfactorily defended. I purposely avoid 
all readings of this nature, in the present investi- 
gation. 

In seeking for all the examples of aicov and 
alcbvco^y in the New Testament, I have used the 
Concordance of Schmidt, which, having been 
published before the critical investigations of the 
Greek were made, may possibly contain some two 
or three instances less of these words, than are to 
be found in the Greek text of Knapp, which is 
the one that I have used. If it should prove 
to be so, or that I have overlooked some one in- 
stance, in such a minute and protracted examina- 
tion, it will not have any effect on the reasoning 



68 Meaning of 

or state of evidence at large, in regard to the 
subject before us. I trust, moreover, that it will 
not be imputed to any design on my part. 



The reader has now before him a full view of 
the manner in which the sacred writers of the 
New Testament employ the words aiaiv and acco- 
vco$. We might next proceed, therefore, to draw 
some conclusion, by comparing the whole together, 
and in this way showing in what sense the sacred 
writers probably applied these words to the future 
punishment of the wicked. But I must beg the 
reader to delay a while longer, in order that we 
may obtain a fuller view of facts relating to the 
usage of these same words by the Septuagint 
translators, and of the corresponding Hebrew word 
D /)Jf. I shall be as brief as possible here; not 
considering it necessary to produce more than a 
few citations, as examples in proof of what may 
be stated. The direct evidence I have fully stated ; 
the indirect, I may be indulged the liberty of 
producing in a briefer and more summary way. 



oW 69 



MEANING OF OVU? IN THE HEBREW OF THE 
OLD TESTAMENT. 

This is, (1.) Eternity, unlimited duration. 

So Gesenius, in the third edition of his Hebrew 
Lexicon, "eternity ;" which is the only definition 
that he gives. He goes on, however, to say, that 
"the expression in Hebrew, as among us in com- 
mon life, is often used in an inaccurate manner, 
i.e. when merely a very long space of time is de- 
noted." Of this, more in the sequel. 

I would remark here, for the sake of brevity, 
that the words in the quotations which follow, 
that are printed in italic, correspond to the He- 
brew word D/iy, in some one of its forms. After 
this explanation I shall not repeat the Hebrew 
word, but only quote the English. 

Gen. ix. 16, that I may remember the everlast- 
ing covenant. 

Gen. xvii. 7, I will establish my covenant . . . 
for an everlasting covenant. 

Gen. xvii. 13, my covenant shall be ... an ever- 
lasting covenant. The same in Gen. xvii. 19. 

Gen. xxi. 33, Abraham . . . called on the name 
of Jehovah, the everlasting God. 

Deut. xxxiii. 27, the eternal God is thy refuge. 



70 Meaning of 

Ps. xc. 2, from everlasting to everlasting thou 
art God. 

Ps. ciii. 17, the mercy of the Lord is from ever- 
lasting to everlasting. 

Ps. cxii. 6, the righteous shall be in everlasting 
remembrance. 

Prov. x. 25, the righteous is an everlasting 
foundation. 

Is. xxxv. 10, the ransomed of the Lord shall 
return and come to Zion, with songs and everlast- 
ing joy upon their heads. 

Is. xl. 28, the everlasting God. 

Is. li. 11, the redeemed of the Lord shall re- 
turn . . . and everlasting joy shall be upon their 
head. 

Is. lvi. 5, 1 will give them an everlasting name, 
that shall not be cut off. 

Is. lx. 19, Jehovah shall be thine everlasting 
light. The same again in lx. 20. 

Is. lxi. 7, everlasting joy shall be to them. 

Is. Ixiii. 12, to make himself an everlasting name. 

Jer. x. 10, the living God [is] an everlasting 
king. 

Jer. xxxi. 3, 1 have loved thee with an everlast- 
ing love. 

Dan. xii. 2, some [shall awake] to everlasting 
life ; and some, to shame and everlasting contempt. 



dW 71 

T 

These are only a small proportion of the cases 
which might easily be produced; but these are 
enough to show what meaning the word usually 
bears in the Hebrew Scriptures. 

As a confirmation of this, I will add a few case3 

where the phrases DTI)? 1J£> D*71^7, etc. are 
employed, which correspond to e/c rov alwva, ei^ 
auova, ere robe alcovo^, etc., in the Septuagint and 
in the New Testament. 

Ex. xiv. 13, ye shall see them [the Egyptians] 
no more for ever. 

Deut. xii. 28, that it may be well with thee, 
and thy children after thee, forever. 

1 Sam. xx. 15, thou shalt not cut off thy kind- 
ness from my house for ever. 

2 Sam. iii. 28, we are guiltless . . . forever. 
Ps. lxxxix. 4, thy seed will I establish forever. 
Ps. exxxi. 3, let Israel hope in the Lord forever. 
Ps. exxxvi. exhibits twenty-six instances, where 

the same sense is certain in them all. 

Under the form D 7 1^*7 ( £ ^ al&va) alone, in 
the sense of forever, Taylor, in his Hebrew Con- 
cordance, has arranged some one hundred and 
seventy-five instances. If we add to these all 
the various forms of the word to which the 
meaning forever, always, time unlimited or with- 



72 Meaning of 

out end, is clearly to be attributed, several hun- 
dreds more must be added to the one hundred 
and seventy-five cases. It is impossible to doubt, 
in regard to the usual meaning of the word in 
the Hebrew Scriptures. But, then, — 

(2.) As Gesenius remarks, D71P is sometimes 
applied (as in common life) to things which en- 
dure for a long time, for an indefinite period. So 
it is applied to the Jewish priesthood, to the Mo- 
saic ordinances, to the possession of the land of 
Canaan, to the hills and mountains, to the earth, 
to the time of service to be rendered by a slave, 
and to some other things of a like nature. But 
all the instances of such a nature, taken collect- 
ively, amount to a very small proportion of the 
whole, and can in no way be looked upon as any 
thing more than a kind of exception to predomi- 
nant, plain, certain usage. 

In our own language (where eternal and ever- 
lasting surely designate a period without end) we 
often employ the same words to designate that 
which seems to have no end, or the end of which 
is not defined or seen. Thus, we say, everlasting 
talker, perpetual scourge, eternal vexation, endless 
trouble, everlasting disquiet, etc. ; all employed, in 
common parlance, for that which endures a great 



while, or for an indefinite period, or which is 
without intermission. Yet who supposes that 
on this account the words everlasting, eternal, per- 
petaal, endless, are not, with the strictest propriety, 
applied to time which has no bounds, or, in other 
words, to eternity ? 

Thus much then for the word when it relates 
to future time. It is very clear that when Gese- 
nius defines it Ewigkeit [eternity], he rightly de- 
fines it. This is its sense, in an overwhelming 
predominance of examples. All the meanings 
derived from this are only exceptions, and amount 
to mere examples of catachrestic usage; i.e. usage 
which is uncommon, or aside from the strict sense 
of the word. Such is the usage in all languages, 
with regard to more or less of important words. 

(3.) In respect to D/1J?, as applied to designate 
time past, it has the same shades of meaning with 
the Greek ol(hv, olaivtot;, as explained. This usage 
is not very frequent,, when compared with the 
designation of time future. Still, there are, in the 
whole, a considerable number of instances; enough 
clearly to exhibit the usus loquendi in this respect. 
Any one may easily find them by consulting his 
Concordance. A number of these I will here 
subjoin, to illustrate the usage in question. 



74 Summary of the Meanings of 

Is. lxiii. 9, 11; Job xxii. 15; Ps, cxliii. 3; 
Prov. xxiii. 10; Is. xlii. 14; Mic. v. 2; Prov. 
xxii. 28; Jer. xviii. 15; Ezek. xxxvi. 2, xxvi. 
20; Ps. xciii. 2, ciii. 17, Ixxvii. 5. 

GENERAL SUMMARY IN REGARD TO DTIJf 

From what has been exhibited in regard to 
D7iy, it is plain that it corresponds throughout 
with the Greek alcov and alcovco^ of the New Tes- 
tament, when employed in their primary sense, 
— viz., as having reference to time, either future 
or past. Of this agreement we shall soon have 
occasion to take further notice. 

But in regard to the secondary class of meanings 
which alcov bears in the New Testament, — viz., 
that of world with \h& various adsignifications 
noticed above, — there is no case in the Old Testa- 
ment Hebrew in which D TIJ7 bears this sense, if we 
except Ecc. iii. 11, which is too doubtful to build 
upon. Putting, therefore, this class of meanings 
out of the account (all of which are deduced from 
the meaning affixed to the word after the Old 
Testament Scriptures were completed, i.e. by the 
later Hebrews), the coincidence between alcov and 

7'iy is very striking; so much so, that nothing 
can be more evident than that the one corresponds 



oViy 75 

with the other in most cases throughout, and that 
each reflects light upon the other. He who tho- 
roughly understands the use of 0/')V * s better 
prepared to understand the meaning of accov; and 
he who has a complete knowledge of the use of 
alcbv is well qualified to understand the use of 

One point only of difference worthy of remark, 
do I find. This is, that it so happens in regard 
to the use of alcbv in the New Testament, that it 
is applied in no case to designate simply a period 
of time which has definite limitations; I mean 
such limitations as from the nature of the case 
must be regarded as definite, and as known to be 

so. For example: in the Old Testament D /)]? 
is applied to the Jewish ordinances, priesthood, 
and kingly succession, to the hills, mountains, 
and world, to the possession of the land of Canaan, 
etc. But in the New Testament, no instances of 
a use so catachrestic as this occur. An indefinite, 
unlimited period is the basis of all the significa- 
tions of alchv and aicbvcoq, there, wherever they 
have a simple reference to time. At most, we can 
only except some few cases, where the reference 
is to past, and not to future time. 

The distinctive trait of usage in the New Tes- 



76 Ac cop and Alcbvcot; 

tament which has now been pointed out, deserves 
consideration, and ought to have its proper weight, 
in determining the signification of the words in 
question by the usus loquendi of the New Testa- 
ment writers. 



AWN and AMNIOZ. 

I. IN THE SEPTUAGINT. 

If I have counted rightly, alcov, in some of its 
forms, is employed in the Septuagint version of 
the Old Testament three hundred and eight times; 

all as translations of DTl)f, in some one of its 
forms. Of these, one hundred and eighty-four 
instances correspond to D Tl)7 7 in the Hebrew, 
and seventy-one to DTI)? 1%, its equivalent. In 
almost the whole of these instances in which alcov 
is employed, the signification of time unlimited, a 
period without end, is, beyond all reasonable ques- 
tion, absolutely certain, just as it is with respect 
to the Hebrew words to which alcov corresponds. 
In the great number of instances in which alcov 
is employed in the Septuagint, some cases occur 
of its catachrestic use, precisely in the same man- 
ner as of the Hebrew word DTI)?, which has 



in the Septuagint. 77 

already been noted above, p. 72. In short, the 
most unpractised observer as to the phenomena 
of language cannot help remarking that alcov is, 
throughout the Old Testament, the word corre- 
sponding to D nV 9 which the Seventy have almost 
uniformly appropriated to this purpose. Nothing 
can be clearer, than that they considered it as its 
equivalent. So much is this actually the case, 
that I have been able to find only about twenty 
cases, in the whole, where the word oloyv is em- 
ployed by them, unless it be as the translation of 

DTI)?. Most of these cases, also, plainly relate 
to expressions in Hebrew which are equivalent to 

DViy,— viz., such as fl)!jb, 1$, H)/ H& and 

*T)?7. The few other cases which exist, plainly 
result from a reading in the text of the Septua- 
gint translators, different from that in our present 
Hebrew Bibles. 

In regard to a I a> v t o c, I nnd ninety-two in- 
stances in which the Septuagint has employed it. 
In six of these, it corresponds to other words than 

D71)?; in all the rest, to some form of this word. 
In respect to the meaning of accovcoz, it is per- 
fectly obvious that the great body of the cases in 
which it is employed will admit of no other 

7* 



78 Bearing of the Testimony 

meaning than that of eternal, everlasting. But 
there are a few cases in which the catachrestio 
use of it must be admitted. Thus the mountains, 
the Levitical statutes, priesthood, rites, covenant, 
also landmarks, waste-places, etc., are called ata>- 

vcoc, precisely in the same manner as D/1J7 is 
sometimes applied in the Old Testament, and cor- 
responding throughout with it. The word accovcoz, 
therefore, is, in the Septuagint, less strictly ap- 
plied to an indefinite time, an unlimited period, than 
it is in the New Testament. Just the same is 
the case with alcbv, as we have already seen. 

I refrain from pursuing my inquiries through 
the Apocryphal books, from which a great co- 
piousness of examples might also be adduced, to 
confirm the view x s which have already been given. 
It is quite superfluous to pursue the investigation 
any further. We have critical materials enough 
before us to make up a decision, if such materials 
can ever avail for this purpose. 



II. BEARING OF THE TESTIMONY ON THE SUB- 
JECT OF FUTURE PUNISHMENT. 

We have now surveyed the use of the words 
alcov and ahbvioz in the whole latitude of their 



on Future Punishment. 79 

Scriptural use ; and we come, at the close, with 
all the views before us which this investigation 
and discussion have afforded, to see if we can form 
a satisfactory judgment as to the meaning of the 
words in question, when applied to designate the 
period of future punishment 

Let us first lay aside all those various mean- 
ings of aicov and aiaiwoz, which cannot have any 
direct bearing on the great question before us. 
Of this class, plainly, are all those in which alcov 
has the secondary meaning of icorld; some few 
peculiar ones only excepted, which I shall here- 
after notice. 

Of the same class, too, are all those meanings 
of alibv and alcbvtoc, which have relation to time 
past. 

It is plain, moreover, that inasmuch as future 
punishment must belong to future time, so altov, 
when connected with the designation of such 
punishment, must (if the laws of universal ana- 
logy in philology and exegesis are to be observed) 
have a like meaning with that which it has when 
applied to other things belonging to a future 
world, and which are yet to take place. 

In all the cases where glory and praise are 
ascribed to God forever, or for ever and ever, it 
will not be credited that the sacred writers mean 



80 Bearing of the Testimony 

to declare, that this will take place for only a de- 
finite period of time, or for certain ages only. It 
will not be doubted, when God is called eternal, 
or when the things of the heavenly world are said 
to be so, that eternity in the proper sense of the 
word is meant. 

I trust it will not be questioned, in regard to 
the nine cases where alow is applied to the happi- 
ness of the righteous in another world, and the 
fifty-one cases where alcbvtoq, is applied to the 
same, that a happiness without limits, without end, 
is intended to be designated. For all these cases, 
which I shall not repeat here, I must refer the 
reader to pp. 31, 59, above, where he will see them 
produced at full length. 

Can it be reasonably doubted, then, that the 
fifteen cases in which aiwv is applied to the future 
punishment of the wicked, and the seven cases 
in which alchvioc. is applied to the same subject, 
have a meaning like that of the preceding cases ? 
The time designated in both is future, the world 
is future. The intention of the writers seems 
very apparently to have been similar in both 
cases. The invariable laws of interpretation, 
therefore, would seem to demand a like exegesis. 

Let us for a moment examine this last position. 

I take it to be a rule of construing all antithe- 



on Future Punishment. 81 

tic forms of expression, that where you can per- 
ceive the force of one side of the antithesis, you 
do of course come to a knowledge of the force of 
the other side. If life eternal is promised on one 
side, and death eternal is threatened on the other 
and opposite one, is it not to be supposed that 
the word eternal which qualifies death is a word 
of equal force and import with the word eternal 
which qualifies life f In no other case could a 
doubt be raised, with regard to such a principle. 
I venture to say that the exception here (if such 
a one must be made) is without any parallel in 
the just principles of interpretation. 

If, then, the words alojv and alwvioc, are applied 
sixty times (which is the fact) in the New Testa- 
ment, to designate the continuance of the future 
happiness of the righteous; and some twelve 
times to designate the continuance of the future 
misery of the wicked ; by what principles of in- 
terpreting language does it become possible for us 
to avoid the conclusion that they have the same 
sense in both crses? 

Will it be said that we must appeal to argu- 
ments here deduced from the light of nature, in 
order to determine the probable meaning of the 
words when connected with the future punishment 
of the wicked ? But how can we do this ? The 



82 Bearing of the Testimony 

light of nature at best, as we have before seen, 
merely renders it probable in some degree that 
the soul may always exist. Does it — can it — 
determine, then, what is to be its condition, and 
how long this is to continue ? It is impossible. 
^Or if we insist still on what the light of nature 
can do, then let us go to those who enjoy it, and 
see how they decided in relation to the question 
before us. Did not the Greeks and Komans hold 
to the eternity of future punishment? Noto- 
riously they did. And could we, with such light 
merely as they had, come to an opposite con- 
clusion? 

But if the declaration of the Scripture is to be 
our guide, in regard to our creed on this point, 
and if we are to ask simply what the Bible de- 
clares, and not what in our view it ought to de- 
clare, then must this great question, like every 
other one in revealed theology, be ultimately 
settled by an appeal to the nature, power, and laws 
of language. Such an appeal I have endeavored 
to make, and the result is what I have expressed 
above. 

It does most plainly and indubitably follow, 
that, if the Scriptures have not asserted the end- 
less punishment of the wicked, neither have they 
asserted the endless happiness of the righteous, 



on Future Punishment. 83 

nor the endless glory and existence of the God- 
head. The one is equally certain with the other. 
Both are laid in the same balance. They must 
be tried by the same tests. And if we give up 
the one, we must, in order to be consistent, give 
up the other also. 

But if the eternity of God's glory, attributes, 
and existence, if the eternity of future happiness, 
are to be given up as revealed doctrines, on what 
basis are these doctrines to be placed ? How are 
we entitled any longer to receive them as true, 
and to hold fast to them as certain ? 

Tell me not of the light of nature here. I 
must believe (I trust there are very many others 
who will feel constrained with me to believe) 
that the gospel has brought life and immortality 
to light, and that no mere "son of nature" "hath 
seen God at any time;" "but that the only be- 
gotten, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath 
revealed him." Believing this — fully believing 
this — I must feel, that the criticism which would 
decide against the endless punishment of the 
wicked, must also, to be consistent, blast my hopes 
of eternal life, and cover the glories of the God- 
head with everlasting darkness. 

I feel constrained, moreover, to ask here, If 
alwv and olwvioq, do not signify eternity and eter- 



84 Bearing of the Testimony 

naly in the Greek language of the Septuagint and 
New Testament, then what terms has this lan- 
guage to express such an idea ? Will any one 
venture to say, that the sacred writers had no such 
idea as eternity and eternal ? If he will, I do 
not think him worthy of refutation. But, if it be 
admitted that the idea in question was familiar to 
them, then by what terms could they express it 
in the Greek language, so appropriate as those 
which have now been examined? 

I admit that a Greek could convey the idea 
of eternity and eternal, in a variety of ways, by 
different modes of expression; just as we can in 
English, or as a Hebrew could in his language. 
It is true, moreover, that the New Testament 
writers, and the Septuagint, have conveyed the 
ideas in question, occasionally, by the use of other 
words, and by peculiar phrases. But, after all, 
the essence of the difficulty remains. The ques- 
tion is substantially unanswered by these con- 
siderations. It cannot be shown that any words 
are so appropriate to the object named, as the 
words acaiv and alcbvtos. 

Still clearer, if possible, is it, that the proper 
word in Hebrew for eternity is DTI^ ; to which, 
in so many hundred instances, al<l)v and aldnvio^ 
clearly correspond. 



on Future Punishment. 85 

Must not every philologist and every serious 
inquirer feel, then, that conjecture is out of ques- 
tion, in regard to determining such a case as that 
before us? The meaning of such words is not to 
be guessed at, but to be made out by analogy, and 
by a regular and impartial application of the laws 
of language. : 

I admit the awful nature of the conclusion, 
that the punishment of a future world is to have 
no end. I do most fully admit, that it is indeed 
"a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living 
God." But what if I should doubt or deny it? 
Can this have any influence on that eternal Judge, 
who will pronounce my final sentence? None. 
Can my denial of what he has said, or my re- 
fusal to explain it in analogy with all his other 
declarations relative to things of the future world, 
or my efforts to fritter away the meaning of his 
declarations, — can all this avail me, when I 
stand an unembodied, naked, helpless spirit 
before his searching eye and the tribunal of 
his almighty power ? Oh, the dreadful thought ! 
What if I deceive myself, and cry out, " peace! 
peace!" while my God saith, "There is no 
peace to the wicked" ? Will this repeal his 
law, alter its meaning, or frustrate its penalty? 
It is indeed a fearful hazard for men to cast 



86 Bearing of the Testimony 

themselves for safety on such a desperate wreck 
as this ! 

If there be any relief for the dark prospects of 
the wicked as to the future, it must come only 
from this source,— viz., that the Bible has dis- 
closed some method of future relief, some encou- 
ragement that future reformation and penitence 
will restore the lost favor of God. But, alas! 
where is this to be found ? On this subject of 
unspeakable and everlasting moment, of tremen- 
dous interest, there is not one assertion — one word 
even— in all the book of God which, when con- 
strued by the usual laws of language, can afford 
a gleam of hope. Where is another state of pro- 
bation described ? "What are the means of grace 
to be enjoyed in hell? Is it the preaching of the 
gospel? Is it the influence of the Spirit of God? 
Who preaches in the bottomless pit? or how shall 
the Spirit of God dwell with blasphemers and 
reprobates ? 

Will misery of itself make men penitent? And 
this, in a world from which the means of grace 
are excluded? All, all makes against such a 
supposition. There is not a sentence in the Scrip- 
tures which asserts it, or even gives any counte- 
nance to it. All the warnings and exhortations 
which the Scriptures contain, go upon the ground 



on Future Punishment 87 

of men's present state of trial being their final 
and decisive one. It is impossible to believe ra- 
tionally that men of such benevolence as were the 
writers of the Holy Scriptures should not have 
told us something about a future probation and 
acceptance, if these were known to them. If they 
have not told us of these, then it is because they 
did not believe in them, they did not know any 
thing of them. And if they did not, how can 
we venture to believe that we have any know- 
ledge of them ? 

On this point, I acknowledge, my convictions 
are strong. I have long searched, with anxious 
solicitude, for a text in the Bible which would 
even seem to favor the idea of a future probation. 
I cannot find it. If others have been more suc- 
cessful in their researches, let them show us the 
proof of it. When this shall be done, in accord- 
ance with the simple laws of interpretation, and 
without the application of a priori theology to the 
Bible, then I promise to renounce my feelings and 
views in regard to the whole subject before me. 

Until then, I must hold to the endless punish- 
ment of the wicked, or give up the endless hap- 
piness of the righteous. And if the hope of this 
must be abandoned, then may we well ask, what 
the gospel has revealed that is worth our know- 



88 Results. 

ing, or of what value is the existence which the 
Creator has given us. 

I take it for granted that all my readers will 
understand, that the evidence in respect to future 
punishment derived from the use of alwv and 
alwvtoc, is only a part — a moderate part — of what 
the Scriptures contain relative to this subject. 
My design, in the present inquiry, is not to pre- 
sent at large the subject of future punishment. 
To produce all the arguments, and examine all 
the objections, would require a book, instead of a 
short essay, and years of study, instead of a few: 
days. 

III. RESULTS. 

Thus have I endeavored to present, as briefly 
as my plan would permit, the result of a philo- 
logical and exegetical examination of the words 
alwv and aicbvto^^ as employed by the writers of the 
New Testament. I may have performed a work 
superfluous for some of my readers, who perhaps 
have elsewhere found what has better satisfied 
their minds, than that which has now been laid 
before them. But if there be any critical and 
hermeneutical essay of this nature, which goes 
the full length of the subject, it is unknown to 



Al(bv and Aicovcoz 89 

me; and I have merely followed my own plan 
in the above researches, and made all my investi- 
gations, without the aid of any lexicons or com- 
mentators. My reason for this has not been an 
aim to be original, much less a disregard to the 
opinions of others. It has been simply this, — viz., 
a desire not to embarrass my mind with any pre- 
vious opinions or views. I wished to form my 
conclusion merely from the word of God, inves- 
tigated with diligence and care, and in a manner 
as unembarrassed as it was possible for me to 
adopt, in my circumstances. 

The result seems to me to be plain, and philo- 
logically and exegetically certain. It is this: 
either the declarations of the Scriptures do not 
establish the facts, that God and his glory and 
praise and happiness are endless, nor that the 
happiness of the righteous in a future world is 
endless ; or else they establish the fact, that the 
punishment of the wicked is endless. The whole 
stand or fall together. There can, from the very 
nature of antithesis, be no room for rational doubt 
here, in what manner we should interpret the 
declarations of the sacred writers. We must 

EITHER ADMIT THE ENDLESS MISERY OF 
HELL, OR GIVE UP THE ENDLESS HAPPINESS 

OF HEAVEN. 

8-* 



90 in the Lexicons. 



IV. IK THE . LEXICONS. 

As a kind of supplement to the above investi- 
gation; and for the sake of communicating a fuller 
view of the words in question than most of my 
readers may readily find, I must beg the liberty 
of adding, by way of appendix, a few strictures 
on the manner in which lexicographers and others 
have treated alwv and alcovto^ It is high time 
that these words were accurately understood, and 
handled in a manner truly philological. If what 
I have said, or may say, will contribute toward 
the accomplishment of so important an object, or 
at least excite others to do what needs to be done, 
my labor will not be in vain. Such of my read- 
ers as pursue the critical study of the Scriptures, 
will probably not be uninterested in the remarks 
which follow. Others may omit the reading of 
them, should they find them to be destitute of 
special interest to their own minds* 

In regard to the lexicons, I shall be brief. I 
perceive, on an examination of Schleusner, that 
my arrangement differs in some respects from his. 
I will not delay here for the purpose of contro- 
verting his arrangement, but only to make a few 
remarks on some parts of it. I must leave the 



AltoV and Alcovtos 91 

rest to the judgment of every reader who will 
take the pains to examine this author. 

The first meaning which he gives to alcbv is, a 
definite and long time, i.e. a long-continued, but 
still a definite, period of time. Under this head he 
arranges Matt* xxi. 19, which is the case of the 
fig-tree that was cursed. Now, the Saviour is re- 
presented by the evangelist as saying, "Let there 
be no more fruit from thee for ever ;" which surely 
does not imply that the time would come to an 
end in which this tree would be barren, and after 
which it would again bear fruit. In other words, 
definite time is clearly not marked here. 

Again, he puts John viii. 35 under the same 
head : " the servant does not abide in the house 
forever, but the Son abideth forever" Can this 
mean, in either case, a definite period of time ? 

His second head is, life of man, age of man, or 
time during which he lives. 

As an example of this, he appeals -to Matt. xii. 
32, "They shall not obtain forgiveness, neither in 
this world, iv toutqj tw alcove" which he renders, 
neither in this life, i.e. in this age of man. But, 
on this ground, what does alcbv mean in the 
antithesis, nor in the life to come? If a definite 
period is simply meant in the first part of this 
antithesis, what is the definite period of the life 



92 in the Lexicons, 

to come ? In other words, when will it cease ? 
This incongruity is avoided when the sense of 
world is given to altov in each case. Both ex- 
pressions together then make out an intensive 
affirmation, equivalent to never ', never. 

Schleusner also appeals to Matt, xxviii. 20, in 
confirmation of the sense which he here gives to 
atcov. "Lo, I am with you always, even to the 
end of the world," ecoz riyc GDVTeMa<; too al&vo? 
(in which, however, he has omitted to insert 
always, ndaa<; r«c ^//i/?«c). This he construes as 
meaning simply, " I am with you to the end of 
your lives;" thus making the whole promise 
attach only to the apostles. I cannot persuade 
myself that this was the meaning of Christ, or 
the only tenor of this promise. 

He then arranges the meaning of accov under, 
(3) Men of any age. (4) External things of the 
present life, riches, pleasures, etc. (5) Method of 
living, genius of the age, manners of the age, (6) 
Vicious men of any age. After all these, comes 
the meaning on which the whole of them turned, 
—viz., (7) World, universe. He comes only in No. 
9 to the meaning of eternity, unlimited period. 

How incongruous this arrangement is with the 
meaning of the word as used in the New Testa- 
ment or the Old, must be apparent from the pre- 



Aicbv and Alcovtoz 93 

ceding exhibitions of this word which have been 
made. How loose and indefinite some of the 
meanings here given are, and how far deflected 
from the original significations of alcov and aid)- 
ptoz, even in the Old Testament, must be very- 
apparent even to an unpractised observer. In- 
deed, it is plain that the Hebrew usage of D71J7, 
as distinguished into the ancient and modern, did 
not once occur to Schleusner, in its proper form ; 
and of course he has failed to do justice to the 
corresponding alwv. 

On the whole, I must consider the article acwv 
in his lexicon, as one of the unfortunate specimens 
of imperfect lexicography, which now and then 
occur in this venerable and (in general) truly- 
valuable writer. 

The lexicon of Wahl, in regard to this word 
as w^ell as very many others, affords a far better 
specimen of skill, neatness, and accuracy of ar- 
rangement. Wahl has arranged thus : (1) Time, 
unlimited duration, cevum. (2) The universe, mun- 
dus. (3) An age, period of the world; under which 
he arranges, (a) The present age, i.e. the Jewish 
age, or period antecedent to the Messiah. Under 
this head he arranges the following senses, — viz., 
(1) Simply, age. (2) Age, with the accessory idea 
ofvitiosity, imbecility, etc. (b) The future age, i.e. 



94 in the Lexicons. 

the reign of the Messiah, a period of happiness, 
liberty, piety, etc. 

This is indeed a great amendment of Sehleus- 
ner's mistaken, unphilological, and (I had almost 
said) unaccountable arrangement. But this ex- 
hibits some important mistakes, which (unless I 
am greatly in error) are adapted to mislead the 
student of the original Scriptures who places too 
much confidence in lexicographal guides. 

Under No. 2, he arranges the signification, uni- 
verse, mundus. I had myself, before I gave the 
words an extended and minute investigation, been 
accustomed to suppose that aiwvss in 1 Tim. i. 17, 
Heb. i. 2, xi. 3, must mean the universe; particu- 
larly, because the plural number is here employed. 
It was doubtless on the like account that Wahl 
also gave it the same signification. But a minute 
inquiry into the grounds of such a rendering has 
convinced me of my own mistake, and, of course, 
that Wahl is also in an error. 

In recurring back to the ancient Hebrew usage 
of D71J/, I observe that there is no apparent dif- 
ference between the use of the plural number and 
the singular, in order to designate time. So 1 Kings 
viii. 13, a settled place ... to abide in forever, 
DVpViy. See also, for the like examples, 2 Cbron. 



Acwp and Alwvioc, 95 

vi. 2; Ps. lxi. 5. Ps. lxxvii. 6, where D^oVlJ? 
has the sense of ancient times. Ps. exlv. 13 (ever- 
lasting). Is. xxvi. 4, xlv. 17; Dan. ix. 24: Is. li. 
9 (ancient). Ecc. i. 10 (id.). Ps. lxxvii. 8 (for- 
ever). Is. xlv. 17, *7^ *Xp 711^ ages of perpetuity, 
for ever and ever. 

These instances make it clear that the plural 
is used in the same sense as the singular, or at 
least without any assignable difference of mean- 
ing. If there be any difference at all, it must 
consist merely in this, — viz., that the plural num- 
ber is a somewhat more intensive form of expres- 
sion than the singular. But although this is 
often the case in Hebrew, yet in the present case, 
the nature of the several instances where the 
singular and plural are used being compared and 
well considered, it will be plainly seen that there 
is no ground for making any assignable difference 
of meaning between the different numbers. 

In just the same way the Seventy have em- 
ployed alwv. Sometimes they have rendered the 

plural of D/1I?, by the singular alwv, e.g. Dan. 

v. 10, let the king reign VDh]n (Chaldee), efc 
zbv aiwva. So Is. lxvii. 17, they shall not be 

ashamed 1)? *P?li? *"!j£, Septuagint ecus too alcbvoq 



96 in the Lexicons. 

he. In the same verse, D\p /1I? is translated by 

aiebveov. In like manner Is- li. 9, 0*9/11? HIT! 

is rendered yzvza ala>vo<;. So Ps. xc. 8, 1i0*7& 
our secret [sins], plural number; but the Seventy, 

reading it 1^9 /#> have rendered it o aia>v -fj[xo)v 9 
Ps. lxxxix. 8. By a like, mistake in reading, 

they have again rendered 0*7*1^?, little children, 
in Job xix. 18, by s*c tov alwva, because they read 

it 0* 9S'11?. 

On the other hand, the Seventy have used the 
plural of alcbv, in order to translate the singular 

of some words which are equivalent to 0/1]?; e.g. 
DTD in Ps. Iv. 20, is rendered npb tcov aicovcw 
by the Septuagint, Ps. liv. 19. 

So also the plural form of 0*711? is often used 
in the Hebrew, as equivalent to the singular, i.e. 
as having the same meaning ; e.g. 1 Kings viii. 
13; 2 Chron. vi. 2 ; Ps. lxi. 5, lxxvii. 6 ; Dan. ii. 
4 (Chaldee), iii. 9, vi. 22, and so frequently. 

I have only to add that a comparison of usage 
in the New Testament will lead to the same 
result with regard to aiebv. 

So far then as it respects the designation of 
time, the singular and plural of alwv answer the 
same purpose. But is this the case in regard to 



Atwv and Alcovtoc; 97 

its use in the secondary and later sense of D71J7 > 
— viz., that of world, etc. ? 

If we go back to Hebrew usage, we shall find 
no example in it to justify the use of the plural 
number in the sense of worlds, i.e. in such a sense 
as astronomy has taught us of the present day to 
employ this plural word. In the old Hebrew, 
Y*)$ means earth; but the plural fil¥*"U$, means 
lands only in the sense of countries, not in the 
sense of worlds. The other appellation for world 
is /2F), which is employed only in poetry. This 
has no plural. 

When the Hebrew wanted to designate the 
heavenly bodies, he said, host of heaven, or stars, 
or sun, moon, and stars; or heavens, simply. 
There is no intimation in Scriptures, as I can 
find, that there is more than one world. 

Hence I must take alcove^ in 1 Tim. i. 17, Heb. 
L 2, xi. 3, to mean world simply, Le. our world, 
this earth. And if it be asked, Whether the 
Scriptures do not ascribe any thing more than the 
creation of our world to the Son of God? the 
answer is given in Heb. i. 10, "Thou, Lord, didst 
lay the foundations of the earth, and the heavens 
are the work of thy hands." The same sentiment 
also may be found in Col. i. 16; Eph. iii. 9; John 
i. 3, and in other passages. 

9 



98 in the Lexicons. 

That the plural and singular of nouns are often 
employed in the same manner, and to designate 
one and the same thing, no tyro in sacred philo- 
logy can fail to know. 

There is nothing at all peculiar, then, in using 
al&vzc, in the same sense as alcov, or in employing 
either of them indifferently to designate the idea 
of world in the singular number. 

I should not have said thus much on the error 
in the lexicons with regard to the plural of this 
word, had I not seen much reasoning about the 
meaning of ages of ages (aiwvsz alcbvcov), that is 
built on a supposed distinction of meaning between 
the singular and plural number. Many writers 
would seem to ask, " What can ages of ages mean, 
unless age is a definite, limited 'period? Of course, 
must not ages of ages, after all, be only a series 
of limited periods, and finally have a termina- 
tion?" 

The answer to this is not difficult. In regard 
to the plural number alcove, it imports of itself 
no more than the singular. In regard to the form 
of expression ages of ages, or age of ages, or age 
of age (for all these are indifferently employed), 
it is a mere intensive form of expression, and 
nothing more nor less. What are servant of ser- 
vants, lord of lords, holy of holies, heaven of hea- 



Accov and Alcbmot: 99 

vens, etc., but intensive forms of expression ? And 
if any one should ask, whether any thing can be 
added to the idea of eternity, of unlimited dura- 
tion? in order to show that there is an incon- 
gruity in employing acwp, in the expressions now 
before us, with an unlimited sense ; I would reply 
by asking, Whether forever in English does not 
mean eternity, unlimited duration? If so, then 
how can we add to it? Yet we do say, for ever 
and ever; that is, we do use an intensive expres- 
sion, in order to designate with emphasis the idea 
of a never-ending period of time. Could not the 

Hebrew, then, say HJ^l DT1J7 /, and the Greek, 
e*C toI>c alawaQ tojv alcbvcov, in the very same sense, 
and for the very same purpose, as we say for ever 
and ever? 

He could; he did; and all criticisms on these 
phrases, which would deduce any thing more 
from them than intensiveness of expression, are 
built on an imaginary basis, not on one which 
has its support in the usus loquendi of either the 
Greek, Hebrew, or English language. 

There is another mistake (as it seems to me) 
in Wahl's article. He has, throughout, made 
present world, etc., and world to come, etc., mean, 
the age preceding the Messiah, and the age after 
his advent. In doing this, he has appealed to 



100 in the Lexicons. 

the Jewish usage of this world, and the world to 
come. But this appeal is very far from sustain- 
ing him. The Rabbinical Jews divided this world 
into the lower world, i.e. the proper earth, with all 
that it contains; the middle world, i.e. the region 
of the air, including the heavenly bodies; and 
the supreme or upper world, i.e. the world of 
angels, etc. 

In regard to world to come, or future world, some 
held it to be the new world, which would arise 
after the destruction of the present ; others (and 
this I take to be the general usage) held it to be 
the world of souls, i.e. the future world in the 
same sense in which we now use this phrase in 
English ; some only (Buxtorf merely says quidam) 
regarded it as meaning the days or age of the Mes- 
siah. Could any one justly expect such a train 
of deduction from this, as appears in the lexicon 
of Wahl? 

Of all the numerous cases which he arranges 
under the head of age before and after the Messiah, 
not more than three will stand the test of investi- 
gation, — viz., 1 Cor. x. 11; Eph. ii. 7; Heb. vi. 
5. Of these, Eph. ii. 7 is by no means neces- 
sarily arranged under the head in question, as it 
may easily be understood simply of ages to come, 
and more probably should be so understood. 



Al(b\> and Accovcoq 101 

As to the other cases, where the present alcov 
and the alwv to come are expressed or implied, I 
take nothing to be more certain than that the 
arrangement of Wahl is fundamentally erroneous. 
It is not only without any basis in predominant 
Jewish usage, but it would force on the text of 
the New Testament a sense strange enough in 
some cases, and unnecessary in all. 

AY hen our Saviour, in the parable of the sower, 
says, " The cares of this world," is there any spe- 
cial relation here to the age which preceded the 
Messiah ? Was there then to be no world, in the 
sense here plainly meant, after the Messiah had 
come ? Rather, does not the whole parable repre- 
sent all the occurrences to which it alludes, as 
taking place under the gospel dispensation ? Yet 
this ivorld, if we may credit Wahl, was now no 
more, inasmuch as the world to come had already 
begun. 

Let any one now examine Mark iv. 19; Luke 
xx. 34; Eom. xii. 2; 1 Cor. i. 20, ii. 6, 8; 2 Cor. 
iv. 4; Gal. i. 4; 2 Tim. iv. 10; Tit. ii. 12; Matt, 
xiii. 40, 49, xxviii. 20, and see what these texts 
can possibly have to do exclusively with the age 
that preceded the Messiah. And yet, if Wahl be 
in the right, they all fall under this class, having 
a relation more or less distinct to such an age. 

9* 



102 in the Lexicons. 

How easy to be misled when we fall upon a 
theory that looks attractive ! Wahl fell upon the 
above theory, in Bertholdt's Christologia Judceo- 
rum, etc., p. 38 seq., and thought it would solve 
many apparent difficulties about alcav in the New 
Testament. But the theory itself, like many other 
things in that undigested and hasty book, needs 
much more confirmation than has been given to 
it, before it can be so extensively applied as Wahl 
has applied it. 

The remarks which I have just made on the 
meaning assigned by Wahl to present and future 
al(i)v y will apply, in all" respects, to the article on 
this same word in the lexicon of Bretschneider, 
who, under the same guide (Bertholdt), has fallen 
into the same errors. 

Had he and Wahl simply read with attention 

the article D*7U7 in BuxtorPs immortal Hebrew, 
Rabbinic and Chaldaic Lexicon, they might have 
avoided such a mistake. This Coryphaeus of all 
Rabbinical investigators has given no occasion 
that any attentive and intelligent reader should 
be misled. 

But it is time to retreat from the examination 
of lexicons. Enough has been said, I trust, to 
put the student on his guard against implicitly 



Al<hv and Accbvcoz in the Lexicons. 103 

following the authority of dictionaries, especially 
in respect to an important article like the present, 
and when the whole of the evidence is not laid 
before him. 



Vi**.# 



USUAL, MEANING- OF THE WOKD. 

The word 71N^ has, not unfrequently, been 
derived by lexicographers and critics from the 

root /NtJ^ ? to ash, crave, demand, require, seek for, 
etc. Now, inasmuch as the grave may be figu- 
ratively said to be rapacious or craving, it has been 
supposed that the name in question was therefore 
given to the grave or under-world; and that 
Sheol means in Hebrew what Oreus rapax does 
in Latin, or the same as insatiable sepulchre does 
in English. 

This etymology, however, is too uncertain to 
be entitled to much confidence. Nor is the origin 
of the word in question, in any good degree illus- 
trated by any of the languages kindred with the 
Hebrew. Of these, the Syriac and Ethiopic only 
exhibit the word, but not in such a manner as to 
cast any important light on its etymology. We 
are left, therefore, merely to the manner in which 



104 



Meaning of Sheol. 105 

the Hebrews employed the word, in order to 
determine its meaning. The examples of it, in 
the Hebrew Scriptures, are somewhat numerous ; 
still, as an investigation of its real import must 
be a matter of deep interest to every serious in- 
quirer, it seems necessary to bring the whole of 
them into view. 

I observe, by way of introduction to the view 
of them which is now to be given, that I have 
simply followed, as my custom is, the Concord- 
ance, and endeavored in each case to determine 
the meaning of the word from the connection in 
which it stands. 

The arrangement with regard to the respective 
meanings of the word in question, which I have 
thought to be the most plain and lucid, is as fol- 
lows,— viz. : — 

I. THE MORE OBVIOUS OR LITERAL SENSE 
OF SHEOL. 

This is, the under-world, the region of the dead, 
the grave, the sepulchre, the region of ghosts or de- 
parted spirits. 

This meaning is general; i.e. the signification 

of the word TlNt^ is generic. In other words, it 
sometimes signifies the region of the dead, to which 



106 Meaning of 

the righteous and the wicked both go; as does 
Hades, the invisible world, in classic Greek authors. 
But as every generic word is capable also of a 
specific meaning, when circumstances require it, 
so, we shall see in the sequel, Sheol may be re- 
garded sometimes as the place to which good men 
go after their death, and sometimes as the place 
to which evil men go ; i.e. the word itself mean3 
the region of the dead in general, and it is made 
particular only by circumstances connected with it. 

I proceed to detail the examples. 

Gen. xxx vii. 35, And [Jacob] said, I will go 
down into the grave, Sheol, unto my son mourn- 
ing ; i.e. Jacob declares that he shall be brought 
down to the grave by mourning, and thus be 
united with Joseph his son, whom he believed to 
have been destroyed by wild beasts. It is not to 
be supposed that Jacob believed Joseph to have 
gone to the world of woe, to hell in the common 
sense of this word as it is now used by us; nor 
that he himself expected to go thither. Indeed, 
it is impossible to mistake the obvious meaning 
of Sheol here, which is simply grave or region of 
the dead. 

Gen. xlii. 38 [Jacob says], Ye shall bring down 
my gray hairs with sorrow to Sheol; i.e. simply 
to the grave, as before. 



Shedl. 107 

Gen. xliv. 29 [Jacob says], Ye shall bring down 
my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave ; the same 
as above. 

Gen. xliv. 31 [Judah says to Joseph, when 
pleading for the liberation of his brother Benja- 
min], We shall bring down the gray hairs of thy 
servant, our father, with sorrow to the grave; in 
the same sense as above. 

Num. xvi. 30 [Moses says of Korah and his 
company], If . . . the earth open her mouth, and 
swallow them up, . . . and they go down alive into 
Sheol; i.e. if they go down alive into the under- 
world, into the region of the dead. That Korah 
and his company went to the world of woe, there 
can indeed be but little, if any, reason to doubt, 
considering their character and the nature of their 
crime. But the words of Moses in this place 
seem to refer primarily to the event which was 
about to take place, — viz., to Korah and his ad- 
herents being swallowed up alive, and thus going 
down into the under- world. 

Num. xvi. 33, They [i.e. Korah and his com- 
pany] went down alive into Sheol ; i.e. they went 
down alive into the under-world, the region of 
the dead. 

In the two last cited passages, our English 
version has pit, as the translation of Sheol. The 



108 Meaning of 

sense of pit is grave, deep cavity, or recess in the 
earth. The sense of hell, given to the word pit by 
occasional usage, is figurative or secondary, and 
not the literal or primary meaning of it. 

Deut. xxxii. 22, For a fire is kindled in mine 
anger, and it shall burn to the lowest Sheol; i.e. it 
shall burn down into the very under-world. So 
the parallelism in the sequel leads us to interpret 
this, which runs thus, "It shall set on fire the 
foundations of the mountains." The image is a 
tremendous one, — viz., that of a fire so intense 
and dreadful as not only to consume all that is 
on the surface of the ground, but to burn deep 
down into the under-world. 

1 Sam. ii. 6, The Lord killeth and maketh alive; 
he bringeth down to Sheol and bringeth up ; i.e. 
he bringeth down to the grave or region of the 
dead, and bringeth or raiseth up from the same. 
That such is the meaning of this passage, seems 
plain from the first part of the verse, in which it 
is said, The Lord killeth and maketh alive : the 
equivalent of which is, the Lord bringeth down 
to Sheol, and raiseth up from it. If by Sheol 
here hell (in its appropriate sense) is meant, then 
how shall the last clause be construed, — viz., The 
Lord bringeth up from Sheol? Is it then a Scrip- 
ture doctrine that the Lord brings up from the 



Shedt. 109 

"eternal pit" those who are once confined there? 
Or rather, do not the Scriptures teach that "the 
smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and 
ever"? 

2 Sam. xxii. 6, the snares of Sheol encompassed 
me; the deadly nets came upon me. Our Eng- 
lish version renders thus : " Tie sorrows of hell 
compassed me about; the snares of death pre- 
vented me," i.e. came before me, for this is the 
sense in which the word prevent is employed, in 
our version, and not in the sense of hinder, which 
would here misrepresent the Hebrew. This 
version evidently sacrifices the parallelism of the 
original Hebrew, in which the snares of Sheol and 
the nets or snares of death are equivalents. It 
seems to sacrifice propriety also ; for in what tole- 
rable sense could David say that the sorrows of 
hell (in our present sense of this word) encom- 
passed him ? But when, in describing a scene of 
the highest danger, he is represented as saying, 
figuratively, "The snares of Sheol encompassed 
me," i.e. such fatal snares as take hold of their 
victim with deadly force, or subject him to death, 
such snares as bring their victim down to the 
region of the dead, then all is plain and proper. 
Then, too, the parallelism with the seoDnd part 
of the same verse is retained, which is, "The 

10 



110 Meaning of , 

snares of death came upon me." On the whole, 
the case is so plain, that no rational doubt can be 
entertained, by any one versed in the original 
languages of the Bible, with regard to its real 
meaning. Comp. Ps. xviii. 5 (6). 

1 Kings ii. 6 [David, charging Solomon to pun- 
ish Joab for the murders he had committed, says], 
Thou shalt not let his hoary head go down to 
Sheol in peace; i.e. thou shalt not let him die a 
natural death, but shalt punish him, or put him 
to a violent death. So our translators, who have 
here translated Sheol by the word grave, thus 
showing how they understood the passage. 

1 Kings ii. 9 [David, charging Solomon to pun- 
ish Shimei, says], Thou shalt bring down his hoary 
head to Sheol with blood; i.e. thou shalt cause 
him to suffer a violent death, and not leave him 
to die a natural one. The passage is of the same 
nature as that above ; and Sheol is also rendered 
grave here by our English translators. The 
meaning of Sheol, in both cases, may be expressed 
by grave, or region of the dead, under-world. 

Job vii. 9, As a cloud is consumed and vanisheth 
away ; so he that goeth down to Sheol shall come 
up no more; i.e. he that goeth down to the grave, 
to the region of the dead, shall no more return 
to the present world, — never rise up again to mix 



Shedl. Ill 

with the living here. So our translators under- 
stood the word Sheol here, inasmuch as they have 
rendered it grave. 

Job ii. 8, It is as high as heaven, what canst 
thou do ? Deeper than Sheol, what canst thou 
know? i.e. deeper than the under- world, the abyss, 
the world beneath; for the antithesis of heaven, 
i.e. the natural heaven, lofty, elevated beyond 
measurement, is plainly intended here; and this 
antithesis can be none other than the abyss beneath, 
the under-world, Hades. Our version, which here 
renders hell, has obscured the exact meaning of 
the passage. 

Job xiv. 13, Oh that thou would hide me in 
Sheol ; i.e. in the grave, or (in other words), Oh 
that I might die ! 

This is one of those cases about which there 
can be no possible doubt. Job might, as thou- 
sands of others have done, wish for death, in a 
time when deep distress and despondency had 
come upon him ; but surely Job did not wish to 
be placed in the world of woe, in hell. Accord- 
ingly, our translators have here rendered Sheol 
by grave. 

Job xvii. 13, If I wait, Sheol is my house; i.e. 
let me die speedily, for if I should continue ever 
so long in life, I must die at last, or go down to 



112 Meaning of 

the grave. So our translators, "The grave is 
mine house." 

Job xvii. 16, They shall go down to the bars 
of Sheol, when our rest together is in the dust; 
i.e. they shall go down into the grave, together 
shall w r e rest in the dust,— viz., in the grave or 
sepulchre. Here our translation has pit, which 
(if it mean grave, as I suppose it does) is correct 
as to the idea conveyed by the passage. The 
place of future punishment cannot be meant here; 
for surely Job did not expect to go to such a place, 
nor were corruption and the worm (which, as he 
here avers, were to " rest together with him in the 
dust") to go with him to a place of future pun- 
ishment. 

Job xxiv. 19, Drought and heat consume the 
snow waters ; so doth the grave those who have 
sinned. So our version; and rightly, for the 
consumption of the body in the grave is clearly 
the idea, here, which the writer designs to ex- 
press. 

Job xxvi. 6, Sheol is naked before him, and 
destruction hath no covering ; i.e. the under- 
world, the world beneath, is open to his all-seeing 
eye, yea, the place of destruction — viz., the grave 
— hath no covering. The idea here is plainly 
of this nature; for the object of the writer is to 



Sheol 113 

place in a striking point of view the omniscience 
of God. In order to do this, he represents him 
as extending his view to the dark world beneath, 
as well as to all parts of the earth that lie exposed 
to the light of day. But our translators have 
here rendered Sheol by the word hell; for which 
I am not able to see any good reason. 

Ps. vi. 5 (6), For in death there is no remem- 
brance of thee ; in Sheol who shall give thee thanks ? 
i.e. in the world of the dead who shall present 
thank-offerings for deliverance from danger? 
How can offerings of this nature be made, when 
fatal evils have overtaken me? The first mem- 
ber of the verse, "In death there is no remem- 
brance of thee," shows the meaning of the second 
member; and of course the meaning of Sheol, 
which may be rendered sepulchre, under-world, or, 
as our version has it, grave. 

It will be remembered that the Psalmist is 
here speaking of his own danger, and praying 
for deliverance. Can it be well supposed that he 
means to express the idea, that if cut off he should 
go to the world of woe, to hell, where no praise 
could be given to God ? 

xvi. 10, Thou wilt not leave my soul [me] 
in Sheol ; neither wilt thou suffer thy Holy One 
to see corruption; i.e. thou wilt not leave me in 

10* 



114 Meaning of 

the grave, nor suffer thy consecrated Messiah to 
consume, or to be turned to corruption there. In 
other words, thou wilt raise me from the dead, 
before the grave exercises the power of corruption 
over me. So Peter construes this passage in Acts 
ii. 24-32, applying it simply to the resurrection 
of Christ from the grave. Indeed, no evidence 
is needed besides the nature of the parallelism in 
the verse, inasmuch as the latter member explains 
the former. We might ask, also, can the soul of 
Jesus be supposed to have been in the world of 
woe, the place of the damned ? I know, indeed, 
that there are some who deduce from this passage 
the doctrine of purgatory, into which Christ de- 
scended in order to preach to "the spirits who are 
in prison." But there is no foundation in this 
text for any such deduction. 

Ps. xviii. 5 (6), The cords of She6l encom- 
passed me ; the snares of death came upon me ; 
i.e. the deadly cords encompassed me. See on 
2 Sam. xxii. 6, above. The English version here 
(hell) has plainly failed to give the appropriate 
meaning ; i.e. this is so, provided the word hell be 
understood as meaning the world of woe. 

Ps. xxx. 3 (4), Thou hast brought up my soul 
from Sheol ; i.e. thou hast kept me alive, amidst 
great dangers, so that I did not go down to the 



Sheol 115 

pit. Here our version has grave; for, indeed, 
any other version would have been an evident 
departure from the meaning of the writer, who 
surely does not mean to say, in this place, that he 
had been brought up from the world of woe. He 
is celebrating the goodness of God in "preserving 
him alive, and keeping him from going down to 
the pit." 

Ps. xxxi. 17 (18), Let the wicked be ashamed, 
and let them be silent in Sheol ; i.e. let them be 
cut off, or let them be punished with the loss of 
life. If we construe Sheol here as meaning the 
world of future misery, it would represent the 
Psalmist as praying that the wicked might be 
sent to that world; an example of which can 
hardly be found, I believe, in the Scriptures; nor 
is it easy for a benevolent mind well to conceive 
how a good man could pray directly for such an 
object as this. On the other hand, if Sheol be 
rendered grave here, as it is in our English ver- 
sion, then we may conceive it altogether possible 
that a good man, a magistrate and a king, whose 
duty it was to cut off certain transgressors, might 
express a wish that the justice due to them in a 
civil respect might be executed. 

Ps. xlix. 14 (15), Like sheep they [the wicked] 
are laid in Sheol, . . .their beauty shall consume 



116 Meaning of 

in Sheol, or be for the consuming of She6l. Here, 
that they are laid in Sheol like sheep, is a cir- 
cumstance which points to the grave, and not 
primarily to the world of woe ; and so the last 
part of the verse also indicates, by the consuming 
of $hedl)—Viz., the consumption or corruption of 
the flesh in the grave. So, also, our English 
translators understood the passage, having ren- 
dered She6l by the word grave, in both cases. 

Ps. xlix. 15, But God will redeem my soul 
[me] from the power of Sheol, i.e. from Sheol. 
In other words, God will preserve me from the 
grave ; he will keep me from perishing like the 
wicked. Whether, under this imagery, more than 
a literal meaning is not here conveyed, as also in 
the example above, will be a matter of inquiry 
in the sequel. 

Ps. lv. 15, Let death seize upon them; let 
them go down alive into Sheol ; i.e. let the grave 
or the under-world swallow them up alive. In 
other words, Let them be speedily and in a fear- 
ful manner punished, or cut off. In respect to the 
sentiment, I would refer the reader to what is said 
on Ps. xxxi. 17, above. There is a serious diffi- 
culty in the way of supposing the Psalmist to 
have prayed that his enemies should go down 
suddenly to the world of future woe. Here, 



Sheol. 117 

however, our English version renders Sheol by 
hell; but why this should be done here, and not 
in Ps. xxxi. 17, it would be difficult to say. 

Ps. lxxxvi. 13, Great is thy mercy toward me; 
and thou hast delivered my soul [me] from the 
lowest Sheol. At first view, it would seem as if 
the Psalmist were here speaking of spiritual de- 
liverance from hell, or the world of future misery, 
and thanking God that by his mercy he had pro- 
vided a way of escape from it. But the next verse 
seems plainly to indicate that deliverance from 
temporal death is here meant. It runs thus : "O 
God ! the proud are risen up against me ; and the 
assemblies of violent men have sought after my 
soul [my life], and have not set thee before them." 
The word &*5J, which our translators have here 
rendered soul, is a common Hebrew word for life, 
and is very often so rendered. It clearly has 
that meaning here ; for soul, in any other sense 
than this, David's enemies surely did not seek 
after. Consequently, we must conclude that the 
deliverance commemorated in v. 13 is a deliver- 
ance from the grave, or under-world, i.e. from 
death. By saying lowest grave or sepulchre, the 
writer designates a most terrible and cruel death, 
or a death of the most shocking nature. 

Ps. Ixxxviii. 4, My soul is full of trouble ; my 



118 Meaning of 

life drawetn near to Sheol ; i.e. to the grave, as 
our English version has expressed it. The con- 
text clearly shows this, in which the writer goes 
on to say, that he is " like the slain that lie in the 
grave;" and asks whether God will "show won- 
ders to the dead, etc." He says also, "Thou hast 
laid me in the lowest pit ;" which will illustrate 
lowest Sheol in Ps. lxxxvi. 13. 

Ps. lxxxix. 48, What man is he that liveth 
and shall not see death ? Shall he deliver his soul 
[life] from the hand of Sheol? i.e. from the power 
of the grave. So our version, "from the hand 
of the grave." The first clause of the verse 
makes the sense of grave, in the latter clause, to 
be certain. 

Ps. cxvi. 3, The sorrows of death encompassed 
me; the pains of Sheol took hold upon me; ix> 
deadly pains, such as lead to death or occasion 
death, took hold upon me. See on Sam. xxiL 6, 
and Ps. xviii. 5, above. 

Ps. cxxxix. 8, If I ascend to heaven, thou art 
there ; if I make my bed in Sheol, thou art there ; 
i.e. if I ascend upwards, on high, thou art there ; 
or if I go downwards, into the world beneath, 
thou art there; which is as much as to say, Thou 
art everywhere, or in all places. More than this 
cannot with any certainty be deduced from this 



Sheol. 119 

passage ; indeed, more than this is altogether im- 
probable. 

Ps. cxli. 7, Our bones are scattered at the mouth 
of Sheol ; i.e. at the mouth of the sepulchre or 
grave, as our version has it ; not at the mouth of 
hell or the world of woe. 

Prov. i, 12, Let us swallow them up alive, as 
the grave; and whole, as those who go down to 
the pit. So our English version; and, plainly, 
according to the sense of the original. The writer 
is repeating the words of men of violence and 
blood, who are mutually exhorting one another 
to the work of destruction. The meaning of their 
words is, Let us kill or destroy, as Sheol does ; i.e. 
extensively and fatally as the grave, 

Prov, xv. 11, Sheol and destruction are before 
the Lord ; how much more the hearts of the chil- 
dren of men ! English version, hell. But here 
the under-world, the deep, dark, secret world, 
seems plainly to be meant. So the accompanying 
word, p^D^? seems clearly to imply. The sen- 
timent is, "God, whose sight penetrates even the 
dark recesses of the grave or under-world, most 
certainly must know what passes in the hearts of 
the children of men." 

Prov. xxvii. 20, Sheol and destruction are never 
satiated ; so the eyes of a man are never satisfied ; 



120 Meaning of 

i.e. the grave and the place of destruction — viz., 
the sepulchre or under- world — are insatiable ; in 
other words, death is always making its ravages, 
and is never satiated. So the Latins, mors rapax, 
oreus rapax, The nature of the imagery here, 
requires us to understand Sheol as meaning grave, 
and not, with our English translation, hell. 

Prov. xxx. 15, 16, There are three things which 
are never satisfied, yea, four things say not, It is 
enough ; the grave (Sheol), the barren womb, the 
earth that is not filled with water, and the fire that 
saith not, It is enough. Here Sheol is correctly 
rendered in our common version. But the same 
reason which led to render it grave here, applies 
in its full force to Prov. xxvii. 20, where is the 
same image and the same sentiment. 

Ecc. ix. 10, There is no work, nor device, nor 
knowledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol, whither thou 
goest; i.e. as our English version has it, in the 
grave, whither thou goest. This is plainly the 
sense of the passage: "Be very diligent while 
life continues ; for death will quickly intervene, 
and then all purposes and efforts, such as you are 
engaged in, will cease." 

Cant. viii. 6, Love is strong as death; jealousy 
is cruel as Sheol ; English version, cruel as the 
grave. This is plainly the sense; for the imagery 



Shedl. 121 

is here taken from the unsparing, cruel, and irre- 
sistible power of the grave or death ; which jea- 
lousy resembles, when it is highly excited. 

Is. v. 14, Therefore Sheol hath enlarged herself, 
and opened her mouth without measure; English 
version, hell. But here the under-world or region 
of the dead is personified, and represented as a 
great, terrible, and insatiable monster, opening 
wide its jaws, even without measure, in order to 
swallow up and devour the intemperate revellers 
who are mentioned in the preceding context. It 
is an image of the like nature with that which is 
represented in Prov. xxvii. 20, xxx. 16. 

Is. xiv. 9, Sheol from beneath is moved for 
thee, to meet thee at thy coming. The prophet 
is speaking of the king of Babylon, who was to 
be slain, and when he should go down into the 
under- world, or Sheol, the ghosts or umhrce of the 
dead there would rise up to meet him with insult 
and contumely. Our English version renders 
Sheol hell. But plainly the region of the dead, 
the land of ghosts, is here meant; for in verse 18, 
all the kings of the nations are said to repose 
in glory there, i.e. to lie in their sepulchres, 
attended with all the ensigns of splendor which 
were* deposited around the bodies of deceased 
kings. 

li 



122 Meaning of 

Is. xiv> 15, Yet thou [the king of Babylon] 
shalt be brought down to Sheol ; English version, 
hell. The word here is most evidently in the 
same sense as above; for so the parallelism which 
follows clearly shows, — viz», "to the sides of the 
pit" 

Is, xxviii. 15, Ye have said, We have a cove- 
nant with death, and with Sheol are we at agree- 
ment; English version, hell. The meaning is, 
We have covenanted with death and Sheol, i.e. 
the grave, not to seize upon us, not to harm us* 
So the sequel shows; for the prophet represents 
them as next saying, "When the overflowing 
scourge shall pass through, it shall not come 
unto us*" 

Is. xxviii. 18, Your covenant with death shall 
be disannulled ; your agreement with Sheol shall 
not stand; English version, hell. This is a repe- 
tition of the passage above, in which the words, 
of course, are employed in the same sense. 

Is. xxxviii. 18, For Shedl cannot praise thee; 
death cannot celebrate thee; English version of 
Sheol, grave. The meaning here is plain, — viz., 
How can the dead, or those in the sepulchre, 
praise thee? Surely we cannot well suppose 
Hezekiah means to say here that hell, i.e. the 
world of torment, cannot praise God. He did 



SkeSL 123 

not expect to perish forever, when he should 
die. 

But when he says, " Sheol cannot praise thee/' 
does he mean that after death there is no ability 
to praise God, no existence of the powers and 
capacities of the soul? I think not. It seems 
to me clearly that this is not his design ; although 
not a few of the later critics have affirmed it to be 
so. Shall we represent the Hebrews, and a He- 
brew monarch enlightened as Hezekiah was, as 
being more ignorant in respect to futurity than 
the Egyptians ? The people of God, who lived 
under the light of a revelation, more ignorant 
than those who were in the midst of Egyptian 
night ? Believe this who will, I must have stronger 
evidence of its correctness than I have yet found, 
in order to give it credit. 

I regard the simple meaning of this contro- 
verted place (and of others like it, e.g. Ps* vi. 5, 
xxx. 9, lxxxviii. 11, cxv. 17, comp. cxviii. 17) as 
being this,— viz., u The dead can no more give 
thanks to God, nor celebrate his praises, among 
the living on earth, and thus cause his name to 
be glorified by them, or thus do him honor before 
them." So the sequel of Is. xxxviii. 18: "The 
living, the living, he shall praise thee ; as I do 
this day : the father to the children shall make 



124 Meaning of 

known thy truth," i.e. thy faithfulness. This last 
clause makes the whole plain; and one is ready 
to wonder that so much skepticism about the 
views of the Hebrews in regard to a future state 
of existence, could have been eked out of the 
verse in question. 

Is. Ivii. 9, And [thou] didst debase thyself even 
to Sheol. The prophet is addressing the idola- 
trous Jews here, who are represented under the 
image of an unchaste female, debasing herself by 
her vile practices. There is a kind of parono- 
masia here upon the word Sheol. " Thou didst 
debase thyself to Sheol," means, Thou didst pros- 
trate thyself very low; and the force of the word 
consists in referring both to the physical and 
moral debasement of a prostitute. The sense of 
Sheol, which is referred to or built upon in the 
figurative use of it here, is under-world, the world 
deep beneath. 

Ezek. xxxi. 15, In the day when he went down 
to Sheol, I caused a mourning ; English version, 
grave. Rightly, for the prophet is speaking of 
the death of the king of Egypt. 

Ezek. xxxi. 16, When I cast him down to 
Sheol with them that descend into the pit ; Eng- 
lish version, hell. But as the subject is the 
same, and the affirmation clearly the same, as 



Sheol. 125 

in the preceding verse, so the version should be, 
grave. 

Ezek. xxxi. 17, They also went down into 
Sheol with him, unto them that be slain with the 
sword; English version, hell. But, plainly, the 
whole relates to physical death here, not to spi- 
ritual. So the context clearly shows. 

Ezek. xxxii. 21, The strong among the mighty 
[the mighty heroes] shall address him from Sheol ; 
English version, hell. Here, the king of Egypt 
is spoken of, and described as falling by the sword 
with other men of war, and going down to Sheol, 
where he is addressed (as the king of Babylon is 
represented to be in Is. xiv. 9, seq.) by the D^3*l> 
the umbrce in the under-world. Of course, grave, 
region of the dead, must be the meaning of She6l 
here. 

Ezek. xxxii. 27, They shall not lie with the 
mighty that are fallen of the uncircumcised, 
which are gone down to -Sheol with their weapons 
of war; English version, hell. But are "the 
weapons of war," then, carried along with fallen 
heroes to the world of future punishment ? Or 
are they merely buried with them, according to a 
very common usage, in the gr^ve ? 

Hos. xiii. 14, I will ransom them from Sheol ; 
O death, I will be thy plagues! O Sheol, I 



126 Meaning of 

will be thy destruction ! English version, grave. 
If this be not the sense, then the sacred writer 
has declared that God will be the destruction of 
the world of woe ; i.e. that he will destroy it, or 
bring it to an end ; a sentiment for which I can 
find no parallel in the Scriptures. But God has 
often declared that the power of the grave shall 
cease, i.e. that a resurrection from the dead or the 
grave shall take place. This is, of course, to 
destroy Sheol, i.e. to disannul its power. 

Amos ix. 2, Though they dig into Sheol, my 
hand shall take them thence; English version, 
hell. The sense clearly is, Although they dig 
very deep, down into the under-world, — *riz., in 
order to conceal themselves, — yet thence my hand 
shall take them [the wicked], 

Jonah ii. 2 (3), Out of the belly of Sheol I cried, 
and thou didst hear my voice ; English version, 
hell. But Jonah was not in hell, i.e. not in the 
place of future torment, but in the belly of the 
fish, and deep down, under the surface of the 
water. So the meaning of under-world, here, is 
very obvious. 

Hab. ii. 5, Who [the Chaldean] enlargeth his 
appetite as Sheol, and like death cannot be satis- 
fied ; English version, hell. But here the sense is 
plainly the same as above, in Prov. xxvii. 20, 



Shedl. 127 

xxx. 16 ; Is. v. 14; i.e. the passage refers to the 
insatiable appetite of death or the grave. 

These are all the passages in" which the word 
Sheol appears to me to occur in the Old Testa- 
ment in the sense given under No. I., above. On 
these, thus presented in detail before the reader, 
I must beg leave now to make a few remarks. 

2. BEMARKS ON THE COMMON TRANSLATION 
OF SHEOL. 

There can be no reasonable doubt, that Sheol 
does most generally mean the under-world, the 
grave or sepulchre, the world of the dead, in the 
Old Testament Scriptures. It is very clear that 
there are many passages where no other meaning 
can reasonably be assigned to it. Accordingly, 
our English translators have rendered the word 
Sheol grave, in thirty instances* out of the whole 
sixty-four instances in which it occurs in the 
Hebrew Scriptures. In many of the remaining 
cases, where they have given a different version 

"* The instances are in Gen. xxxvii. 35, xlii. 38, xliv. 29, 31 ; 
1 Sam. ii. 6 ; 1 Kings ii. 6, 9 ; Job vii. 9, xiv. 13, xvii. 13, 
xxi. 13, xxiv. 19 ; Ps. vi. 5, xxx. 3, xxxi. 17, xlix. 14, 15, 
lxxxviii. 3, lxxxix. 49, cxli. 7 ; Prov. i. 12, xxx. 16 ; Ecc. 
ix. 10 ; Cant. viii. 6 ; Is. xiv, 11, xxxviii. 10, 18 ; Ezek. xxxi. 
15 ; Hos. xiii. 14 bis, 



128 Meaning of Shedl. 

of the word, i.e. translated it hell, it is equally 
clear that it should have been rendered grave, or 
region of the dead. This has been clearly shown, 
by producing the instances in the above exhibition 
of examples. 

In three cases, they have recognized the same 
principle (at least this seems to have been their 
view), — viz., Numb. xvi. 30, 33; Job xvii. 16, 
where it is translated pit. 

In regard to most of the cases in which they have 
rendered the word hell, it may be doubtful whether 
they meant thereby to designate the world of future 
torment. The incongruity of such a rendering, at 
least in not a few cases, has been already pointed 
out, in the citations of the respective examples 
above, and therefore need not here be repeated. 
The inconstancy with which they have sometimes 
rendered Sheol, in the same connection and with 
the same sense, is a striking circumstance, which 
cannot but be regarded with some wonder by an 
attentive inquirer. Nor is this always to be attri- 
buted to different translators (who are known to 
have been employed in making the English ver- 
sion) ; but the same translator has been occasion- 
ally inconsistent with himself: e.g. Ezek. xxx. 15, 
compared with Ezek. xxxi. 16, 17. 

But setting aside all this, and simply recurring 



Nature of Figurative Language. 129 

to the original as a foundation for our exegesis, 
is there not some reason to believe, that in some 
of the cases where Sheol is employed, it stands 
as a word employed in a secondary sense, in order 
to designate the future world of woe ? 

This is an interesting question, the solution of 
which depends on the nature of figurative language, 
and the manner in which it is employed in order 
to designate the things of a future world. 



3. MANNER OF USING FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE 
IN RESPECT TO THE OBJECTS OF A FUTURE 
WORLD. 

On the nature of figurative language, then, as 
employed to designate the objects of the invisible 
world, I must beg leave here to suggest a few 
considerations, which may serve more fully to 
explain what I~shall say in the sequel. 

Spoken language is the expression of ideas by 
means of sounds, i.e. articulate words. Written 
language is the expression of ideas by means of 
conventional signs, i.e. letters, which are presented 
to the eye, and, through the medium of this, find 
access to the mind. Both spoken and written 
language is merely the expression of our ideas. 
Both agree in this,-— viz., that they are convert- 



130 Nature of Figurative Language. 

tional; conventional, I mean, as to the particular 
sounds or forms of which they consist. That 
language is natural to man, as much so as under- 
standing and reason are, is what I fully believe. 
But that there may be a great variety of sounds 
employed in order to convey the same idea — that, 
for example, different individuals may call the 
sun by names of very different sounds — all know 
to be matter of fact. But this would not prove 
that the faculty of speech is not a constituent 
part of the nature of man. It only proves that 
there are various ways in which this faculty may 
be exercised. 

I call spoken language, therefore, conventional 
as to its form or sounds, merely, because nature 
does not make any one language universal and 
necessary; and what is not universal and neces- 
sary may with propriety be called conventional, 
using this word in a modified sense of it, to denote 
what results from the voluntary agreement and 
usages of men. 

In the same manner all written language is 
conventional. Every nation has its own peculiar 
modes of writing; some of which differ very widely 
from others, not only in the forms of letters, but 
in the letters or alphabets themselves. 

But all language, whether spoken or written, 



Nature of Figurative Language, 131 

being only the expression of ideas which are enter- 
tained by the human mind, an important question 
remains respecting these ideas themselves, — viz., 
What are the sources of them ? Or, whence does 
the mind derive them ? When this question is 
answered, others can easily be raised, which stand 
in close connection with it. 

It is now pretty generally agreed (at least in 
the English world, so far as I know) that the 
sources of all our definite ideas are sensation, re- 
flection, and consciousness. [May we not add, 
moral nature?] Some might contend against 
consciousness, because they resolve it into remi- 
niscence of experience, either by sensation or re- 
flection. This, however, is not important to my 
purpose. The fact is all I wish for here ; not to 
settle the question by what name it shall be 
called. 

But how extensive are the objects of our senses, 
and of reflection and consciousness ? Plainly, they 
are limited to the visible, perceptible, external 
world without us, and to our own internal man. 
All language is formed merely to designate, in 
its original use, the ideas which we derive from 
the one or the other of these sources. If we go 
beyond this circle, and strive to express concep- 
tions of other objects, the mind employs the words 



132 Nature of Figurative Language. 

which already exist, and which have originated 
from one of the sources above mentioned, in a 
secondary, a qualified, or a figurative sense. It 
traces some analogy between things within the 
circle of its knowledge, with those which are be- 
lieved to lie beyond the boundaries of its imme- 
diate perception, and applies language in such a 
manner as accords with this supposed analogy. 

For example, and that I may more fully illus- 
trate my meaning : God is not the object of any 
of our senses, internal or external. But by the 
powers of reason, and by the force of the moral 
nature that exists within us, we arrive at a con- 
viction, that there must exist, and that there does 
exist, a Being above us, of almighty power, and 
of infinite wisdom, who has created and who 
governs all things. We undertake to describe 
him. But we have not seen him ; we have not, 
in any way, been able to subject him, as he is 
in himself, to the examination of any of our 
faculties. The language that we speak did not 
originate from those who had ever formed any 
conceptions of the Divinity through the medium 
of their senses. Of course, we have no words 
which directly convey to us, by themselves, the 
idea of God as he is in himself. We can only 
describe him by language employed in the way 



Nature of Figurative Language. 133 

of analogy. We regard him as a rational being, 
and as such we borrow terms descriptive in 
themselves of the various parts or passions and 
affections of men, in order to convey ideas of the 
Supreme Being. We speak of God as having a 
heart, and hands, and arms, and feet ; of exer- 
cising the affections of anger and love, hatred and 
benevolence, revenge and compassion ; in a word, 
we apply to him most of the expressions used by 
men to describe the parts or passions and affec- 
tions of each other. We are compelled to do so, 
by the poverty of human language, by the original 
principles of its formation. 

The same holds true in regard to all descrip- 
tions of the invisible world, of heaven and hell. 
Heaven is represented as a paradise, i.e. a plea- 
sure-garden ; as a city with most magnificent walls, 
structures, and ornaments; as a place of perpetual 
feasting and delight; as a land of rest and over- 
flowing plenty; as a magnificent palace, in which 
the guests appear adorned with princely robes 
and splendid crowns and are admitted to the im- 
mediate presence of the great King of kings. 

Hell is represented as an abyss, a bottomless 
pit, a lake that burneth with fire and brimstone, 
the smoke of which ascendeth up for ever and 
ever ; a Gehenna, where the worm dieth not, and 

12 



134 Nature of Figurative Language. 

the fire is not quenched; as a place of outer dark- 
ness, of unceasing and eternal gloom; as a loath- 
some dungeon, a horrid prison; as a place of tor- 
ture, and anguish, and unspeakable pain; a place 
of banishment from God, on which all the vials 
of his wrath are poured out; and by other such 
tremendous images, all drawn from natural objects 
of terror and distress. 

That the Scriptures everywhere pursue this 
method of representing to us the things of the 
invisible world, must be familiarly known to 
every attentive reader of them. That none of 
these descriptions are to be literally understood, 
seems to be exceedingly obvious; for if any one 
is to be literally understood, which is the one ? 
Who will determine this question? If, then, there 
are no particular grounds for making any such 
determination, we must either construe all of them 
figuratively, or all of them literally. Not the 
latter, because then the Bible must be made to 
contradict itself, beyond all possibility of recon- 
ciliation. It must also be made to contradict the 
nature of the spiritual and invisible world. The 
former, therefore, is the only principle which can 
be admitted. 

The sum of all is, that analogy is brought to 
the aid of the mind, in such descriptions, which 



Nature of Figurative Language. . 135 

the poverty of language forbade the sacred writers 
to make out by any use of words in their literal 
sense. Such a use of them would be, to make 
the invisible world a mere copy of the visible 
one ; a world of spirits altogether like a world 
of matter. But this cannot, with any show of 
reason, be charged upon the sacred writers ; and 
therefore we must admit that the language of 
which I have been speaking is employed only 
in a qualified, figurative, analogical sense. 

If this principle, so plain, so reasonable, so 
universally admitted in many cases, be well un- 
derstood, and thoroughly admitted by my readers 
in the case before us, we are now prepared to 
make a near approach to the question, Whether 
Sheol is ever employed in the figurative or second- 
ary sense, in the Old Testament? 

But in order to prepare the way still further, 
so that we may obtain satisfaction in regard to 
this subject of inquiry, let us contemplate, for a 
moment, the use which the Scriptures have made 
of the words live and life, die and death, in respect 
to the happiness of the righteous, and the punish- 
ment of the wicked. 

To live, and to have life, are, beyond all doubt, 
very often employed in the Scriptures, in order 
to denote the reward which the righteous shall 



136 Nature of Figurative Language. 

receive for obedience to the divine commands. 
Thus Moses says, in the name of God, to the 
children of Israel, Lev. xviii. 5, Ye shall keep my 
statutes and my judgments ; which, if a man do, 
he shall live in them ; which is repeated Neh. ix. 
29, Ezek. xx. 11, 13, 21. So Prov. iv. 4, Keep 
my commandments, and live; which is repeated, 
Prov. vii. 2. Also Is. liii. 3, Hear, and your soul 
shall live. Ezek. iii. 21, If thou warn the right- 
eous man, that the righteous sin not, and he doth 
not sin, he shall surely live, he shall not die; re- 
peated in Ezek. xviii. 9, 17, xxxiii. 13, 15, 16, 19. 
Seek ye me, and ye shall live, Amos iv. 5, 6. 

In the New Testament the instances are very 
numerous. Luke x. 28, This do, and thou shalt 
live. John vi. 15, He that eateth me shall live 
by me [Christ]. John xi. 25, He that believeth, 
though he were dead, yet shall he live. John xiv. 
19, Because I live, ye shall live also. Rom. viii. 
13, If ye, through the Spirit, mortify the deeds 
of the flesh, ye shall live. Heb. x. 28, The just 
shall live by faith. 2 Tim. ii. 11, If we be dead 
with him [Christ], we shall also live with him, 
Heb. xii. 9 ? Shall we not much more be in sub- 
jection to the Father of our spirits, and live? 
John iv. 9, He hath sent his Son, that we might 
live through him. 



Nature of Figurative Language. 137 

These examples may suffice, in regard to the 
use of the verb live. 

The noun life is altogether correspondent with 
it, in regard to the meanings which it is employed 
to convey. E.g. Deut. xxx. 15, See, I [Moses] have 
set before thee, this day, life and good, and death 
and evil. Here the words good and evil are added, 
merely as explanatory of life and death; or rather, 
I may say, they are employed as mere synonymes 
with them, and serve, by repetition, to give inten- 
sity to the affirmation of the speaker, according 
to the usual custom of the sacred writers. The 
same expression is repeated in Deut. xxx. 19, with 
the omission of good and evil, and manifestly in 
the same sense as in v. 15. So Jer. xxi. 8, I set 
before you the way of life, and the way of death. 
Deut. xxxii. 47, For it is not a vain thing, becauso 
it is your life. Ps. xvi. 11, Thou wilt show me 
the path of life. Prov. ii. 19, Neither take they 
hold of the paths of life. Prov. iii. 18, She is a 
tree of life, to them that lay hold upon her. Prov. 
iv. 22, They [the words of God] are life unto those 
that find them. Prov. iv. 23, Keep thy heart 
with all diligence, for out of it are the issues of 
life. Prov. v. 6, Lest thou shouldest ponder the 
paths of life, her ways are movable. Prov. viii. 
35, Whoso findeth me findeth life. To the same 

12* 



138 Nature of Figurative Language. 

purpose are Prov. x. 11, 17, xi. 30, xii. 28, xiii. 
12, 14, xiv. 27, xv. 4, xvi. 22, xviii. 21, xxi. 21; 
Ezek. xxxiii. 15; Mai. ii. 5. 

In the New Testament the instances are very- 
numerous. E.g. Matt, xviii. 8, and Mark ix. 43, 
It is better for thee to enter into life, halt or 
maimed, etc. So xviii. 9, and Mark ix. 45, It is 
better to enter into life, with one eye, etc. Matt, 
xix. 17, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the 
commandments. John i. 4, In him [Christ] was 
life. John iii. 36, He that believeth not the 
Son shall not see life. John v. 29, the resurrec- 
tion of life. John v. 40, Ye will not come unto 
me, that ye might have life. In the like sense 
John vi. 33, 35, 48, 51, 53, 63, viii. 12, xi. 25, 
xiv. 6, xx. 31; Acts iii. 15; Rom. v. 17, 18, 
viii. 2, 6, 10; 2 Cor. ii. 16, iii. 6, iv. 10, 12, v. 4; 
Gal. iii. 21; Phil. ii. 16; Col. iii. 4; 2 Tim. i. 1, 
10; James i. 12; 1 Pet. iii. 7; 2 Pet, i. 3; 1 John 
i. 1, 2, v. 12, 16; Rev. ii. 7, 10, xxi. 6, xxii. 1, 
14, 17. 

Such are the examples of the method in which 
the words live and life are employed in the Scrip- 
tures. That they designate the reward of the 
righteous, whether in time or eternity, is a clear 
case; so clear that I deem all further effort to 
establish the point entirely needless. The ex- 



Nature of Figurative Language. 139 

amples themselves are the most powerful argu- 
ment which can be adduced. 

On the other hand, it is equally plain and cer- 
tain that the words die and death are employed 
in order to designate the punishment of the wicked. 
From the very numerous examples of this kind, 
I would present the following, — viz. : 

Ezek. xviii. 4, The soul that sinneth shall die; 
which is repeated in xviii. 20. So also, in Ezek. 
xviii. 17, He shall not die; v. 18, he shall die; v. 
21, he shall not die; v. 21, Have I any pleasure 
at all that the wicked should die? v. 24, In his 
trespass that he hath trespassed, . . . shall he die; 
v. 26, in his iniquity that he hath done shall he 
die; v. 28, he that turneth away from his trans- 
gression . . . shall not die; v. 32, I have no plea- 
sure in the death of him that dieth. Pro v. xv. 10, 
he that hateth reproof shall die. Prov. xix. 16, 
He that despiseth my ways shall die. Ezek. 
xxxiii. 8, the wicked man shall die in his iniquity; 
so also in v. 9. In xxxiii. 11, Why will ye die, 
O house of Israel? v. 13, he that hath committed 
iniquity shall die; v. 14, when I say unto the 
wicked, Thou shalt surely die; v. 15, if the wicked 
. . . walk in the statutes of life, ... he shall not 
die. Prov. xxiii. 13, If thou beatest him with a 
rod, he shall not die. 



140 Nature of Figurative Language. 

The instance of threatening in Gen. ii. 17, In 
the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die 
(and the like expression in Gen. iii. 3, 4), is to be 
construed according to the evident tenor of the 
above examples. 

In the New Testament the usage is exceedingly- 
plain, in various examples ; e.g. John v. 60, This 
is the bread that cometh down from heaven, that 
a man may eat thereof and not die. Rom. viii. 
31, If ye live after the flesh, ye shall die. John 
viii. 21, Ye shall seek me, and shall die in your 
sins. 

In the like manner is the word death em- 
ployed, in order to designate the evils consequent 
upon the commission of sin; e.g. Deut. xxx. 15, 
See, I have set before you, this day, life and good, 
death and evil; in Jer. xxi. 8, I have set before 
you the way of life, and the way of death. Prov. 
v. 5, Her feet go down to death. Prov. viii. 36, 
All they that hate me love death. Prov. xii. 28, 
In the pathways thereof, there is no death. Ezek. 
xviii. 32, I have no pleasure in the death of the 
wicked; so also in xxxiii. 11. 

In the New Testament this usage is very pro- 
minent ; e.g. John viii. 51, If a man keep my say- 
ing, he shall never see death. Rom. vi. 23, The 
wages of sin is death. Eom. vi. 21, The end of 



Nature of Figurative Language. 141 

those things is death. Roru. vi. 16, Whether [ye 
are the servants] of sin unto death. Rom. vii. 5, 
The motions of sin did work to bring forth fruit 
unto death. Rom. vii. 10, The commandment to 
life, I found to be unto death. Rom. vii. 13, Was 
then that which was good, made death unto me ? 
Rom. vii. 24, Who shall deliver me from the body 
of this death t Rom. viii. 2, The law of the Spirit 
of life . . . hath freed me from the law of sin and 
death. Rom. viii. 6, To be carnally-minded is 
death. 2 Cor. ii. 16, To the one we are the savor 
of death unto death; i.e. a deadly savor causing 
spiritual death. 2 Cor. vii. 10, The sorrow of 
the world worketh death. 2 Tim. i. 10, Our 
Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death. 
Heb. ii. 14, That through death he might destroy 
him that had the power of death. James i. 15, 
Sin, when finished, bringeth forth death. 1 John 
iii. 14, He that loveth not his brother, abideth in 
death. Rev. ii. 11, He that overcometh, shall not 
be hurt of the second death. Rev. xx. 6, On them 
the second death had no power. Rev. xx. 14, This 
is the second death. 

The importance of the principle of interpreta- 
tion, which is connected with examples of this 
nature, is my apology for producing them at such 
length. When the mind once becomes entirely 



142 Nature of Figurative Language. 

satisfied that the objects of the invisible world 
can be revealed to us only in language which is 
already formed, and formed from the notices which 
our senses, external or internal, take of the objects 
within their reach; it is then that we begin to 
have some due apprehension of the nature and 
extent of figurative language, as employed by 
the sacred writers. These writers had a vivid 
impression of the joys of heaven and the pains 
of hell, of the reward of virtue and the punish- 
ment of vice, in the world to come. These ideas 
they could not convey in language which origin- 
ated from notice of these objects taken by any of 
our senses ; there was no such language for their 
use. They must, then, from the nature of the 
case, employ such language as they had ; they could 
not use such as they had not, nor such §3 would 
be unintelligible to others. Of course, they must 
employ language which was originally designed 
to convey ideas, of impressions received by our 
external or internal senses ; and, consequently, 
language designating ideas of sensible objects, in 
its primary and literal acceptation. 

If now we make the inquiry, why live and life, 
die and death, should be employed to represent 
the joys and sufferings of the world to come, the 
answer will not be difficult. Life is of all things 



Secondary Signification of 143 

most dear. " All that a man hath, will he give for 
his life." Death, of course, is of all things most 
dreaded. It is the consummation of all suffering; 
the highest penalty which can be inflicted. 

Should one, then, range the whole compass of 
human language, he could find no two terms so 
significant as these, in order to designate the joys 
of heaven or the pains of hell. To do this they 
must indeed be figuratively employed. But the 
same is true of all other words that are or could 
be employed for the same purpose. Of course 
this is no objection to the use of them. 

It is easy to see, therefore, why the sacred 
writers have chosen these highly significant words 
in order to convey an idea of the impression 
made on their own minds respecting the joys of 
heaven and the pains of hell. "The wages of 
sin is death, but the gift of God eternal life." Is 
it in the power of language to convey a stronger 
impression of the retributions that will be made 
in the invisible world, than such an expression 
conveys ? 

II. SECONDARY SIGNIFICATION OF SHEOL. 

If the mind is satisfied in regard to the view 
of the subject given above, there remains but 
little to be said, in order to satisfy it respecting 



144 ShedL 

the possibility of applying Sheol in a similar way. 
Sheol and death are most intimately connected. 
They often stand together in the same verse, con- 
stituting the corresponding parts of a parallelism. 
Whatever may be said of death, as an image of 
terror and distress, may be applied with equal 
force to Sheol. The grave, the under-world, the 
region of the dead, is of course most intimately 
connected with death itself. 

Sheol, then, may be used in a secondary sense, 
to denote the world of misery, the region of " the 
second death." It is no objection to this that it 
is generally employed in its first and literal sense; 
for such is the case with the words live, life, die, 
death. Yet this does not at all prove that these 
latter words are never employed in any other than 
a literal sense. Such a principle indeed, if ad- 
mitted, would prove that no words are, or can be, 
employed in a figurative sense; for, in a majority 
of cases, nearly all words have a literal sense. 

Suppose now that I should say, The word God 
sometimes means a carved piece of wood, a molten 
image, or an object of the njatural world; and be- 
cause it sometimes means a block of wood, there- 
fore it can never designate the true God. Would 
this reasoning be regarded by any candid and 
intelligent man as of any validity ? Surely not. 



Secondary Signification of Shedl. 145 

Suppose then I should aver that because Sheol 
usually means grave, sepulchre, under-world, there- 
fore it never can mean the world of woe: would 
this reasoning be any more conclusive? Plainly, 
not. 

If, then, the words to die and death are often 
employed to designate the misery of the wicked, 
may we not expect that Sheol will partake with 
them of this same usage? 

It will not be said, I trust, that such an ex- 
pectation is unreasonable or unnatural. 

We have seen, then, that there is nothing which 
can determine, a priori, against such a use of the 
word Sheol as has been just described. We may 
now come, therefore, to examine the question of 
fact itself, — viz., whether the word is actually so 
employed, — without being prejudiced against any 
of the proofs or evidences which may be prof- 
fered in order to show that such is probably the 
case. 

THE CASES IN WHICH SHEOL MAY DESIGNATE 
THE FUTUKE WORLD OF WOE. 

Job xxi. 13, They [the wicked] spend their days 
in wealth, and in a moment go down to Sheol. 

Ps. ix. 17 (18), The wicked shall be turned into 
Sheol, and all the nations that forget God. 

13 



146 Shedl 

Prov. v. 5, Her feet go down to death, her steps 
take hold on Sheol. 

Prov, ix. 18, But he knoweth not that the 
ghosts are there, and that her guests are in the 
depths of Sheol. 

Prov. xxiii. 14, Thou shalt beat him with a 
rod, and shalt deliver his soul from Sheol. 

I might add some other texts apparently of the 
same tenor with these ; but I shall defer the men- 
tion of them until I have made some remarks on 
those already produced. My great object is not 
to multiply the number of texts which may pos- 
sibly be brought within the limits of such a 
meaning as I here suppose Sheol to have ; but to 
illustrate the principle that is concerned with the 
exegesis of texts which exhibit the word Sheol. 

In attentively considering the texts just ad- 
duced, is it not plain that the exegesis would be 
an easy and natural one, to apply them to the 
future punishment of the wicked ? I do not say 
eternal punishment here, because, if we admit 
that Sheol here designates future punishment, we 
must also admit that it does not determine, of 
itself, the duration of that punishment. After 
what has been said, above, of the scriptural use 
of the words die and death, it cannot be said, with 
any show of reason, that it would be strange or 



A Place of Punishment 147 

singular that Sheol should here designate future 
punishment ; I mean, that it cannot seem strange 
to any one who acknowledges the Scriptures as 
revealing the doctrine of future punishment in 
any form whatever. To those who do not acknow- 
ledge this, I am not addressing myself. Such 
have first to be convinced that the Bible is the 
word of God, before they can be convinced, by 
any proofs drawn from it, with regard to future 
punishment. Although they may not know it, 
or may be unwilling to acknowledge it, yet they 
are plainly skeptics as to the divine origin and 
authority of the Scriptures. To say that the Bible 
is the word of God, and yet to aver that there is 
no future punishment threatened by it, is so pal- 
pable an exhibition either of ignorance, or of un- 
belief, or of dishonesty, that an ingenuous man can 
hardly believe in any professions of respect for 
the Bible, which such a person may make. 

The probability that Sheol designates the future 
punishment of the wicked, in the passages just 
cited, depends perhaps, in a great measure, on the 
state of knowledge among the Hebrews with re- 
gard to future rewards and punishments. I am 
well aware, as I have already hinted above, that 
there are critics who maintain that the Hebrews 
had no knowledge or belief of any such doctrine. 



148 Shedl. 

But as it is now past all doubt that the ancient 
Egyptians (of Moses' time) did believe and teach, 
very expressly, the doctrine in question, I am not 
able to comprehend how Moses, "who was learned 
in all the wisdom of the Egyptians," should have 
been ignorant of this doctrine. Nor, as I have 
already said, can I be persuaded, without strong, 
yea, irrefragable evidence, that the people of God, 
among whom were patriarchs and prophets, knew 
less respecting a future state of rewards and pun- 
ishments than their heathen neighbors who were 
wholly destitute of any special revelation. 

We have, then, no good reason to believe that 
the ancient Hebrews rejected the doctrine of the 
soul's immortality, or even doubted of it. The 
modern Sadducees, indeed, entertained doubts of 
this nature. But this sect arose only a short time 
before the commencement of the Christian era; 
and the peculiar opinions which it maintained 
were derived, beyond all reasonable doubt, from 
skeptical Greek philosophers. The Pharisees 
held fast to the doctrines, on this subject, which 
had been derived by tradition from their an- 
cestors. 

Circumstances being such, then, as these con- 
siderations show them to be, I see not how it can 
ever be made out, with any good degree of cer- 



A Place of Punishment. 149 

tainty, that the texts in question have no reference 
to future punishment. I admit that they are 
susceptible of another interpretation, i.e. that an- 
other interpretation is possible. But this does not 
reach the point in question. Are they not also 
susceptible of an interpretation which would 
make them designate the future misery of the 
wicked? Is not this latter interpretation even 
more probable than the former ? An answer to 
these questions will touch the difficulty which the 
case presents. 

The first question has been already answered, 
by the examples produced of the manner in which 
the words die and death are employed by the 
sacred writers. In regard to the second question, 
it may be said that the example in Job xxi. 13, 
is not altogether so probable as to afford entire 
satisfaction. Verses 17, 18, 21, 30-33, it may be 
alleged, seem rather to incline the mind to con- 
strue Sheol in v. 13 as meaning grave; and so our 
English translators have done. 

I have no doubt that Sheol in this case does 
involve the idea of sudden death or dying, as a 
calamity. The question, however, is, whether in 
the mind of the speaker, in such a case, any thing 
more was probably contemplated, than the simple 
fact of sudden natural death f The answer to 

13* 



150 Shedl 

this must of course depend on the fact whether 
the speaker believed in any future retribution, 
any future punishment of the vicious and reward- 
ing of the virtuous. In case he did (and who 
will undertake to show that he did not?), then 
how can we avoid the apprehension that he con- 
nected with going suddenly and violently down 
to Sheolj the idea of a miserable condition there ? 
How can we rationally avoid such an appre- 
hension ? 

In regard to Prov. v. 5, and ix. 18, how can 
they have any special significancy, if Sheol does 
not here mean something more than grave? 
Neither sudden death nor violent death appears 
to have been specially attendant upon the prac- 
tice of illicit intercourse, in ancient times. What, 
then, is the significancy of the texts before us, if 
they do not refer to future retribution ? 

So in Prov. xxiii. 14, it is certainly clear that 
the meaning will be a good one if we suppose 
Sheol here to designate future punishment At 
the same time it may be admitted that the other 
meaning — viz., sudden and violent death or pre- 
mature death — is a possible one ; yet on the whole 
can we regard it as probable, when the verse pre- 
ceding declares that correction will save a child 
from death? Is not death here the misery which 



A Place of Punishment 151 

is consequent upon sin? And if so, then does 
not Sheol in v. 14 mean a state of punishment f 

I have spoken of sudden and violent death, or 
premature death, as being the kind of death 
threatened to the wicked, whenever the threaten- 
ing has reference merely to the present world. 
To suppose that death simply, without its being 
sudden or premature, is threatened in these cases, 
would be a supposition quite idle, and, I had 
almost said, ridiculous. Do not the righteous 
die, as well as the wicked ? Is it not " appointed 
unto all men once to die" ? And is there any 
distinction, here, between the righteous and the 
wicked ? None ; and of course, to threaten the 
wicked that they should die simply, would be 
to threaten them not at all ; for the same threat 
could, with equal truth, be made against the right- 
eous. To die, then, in the usual manner, is not 
a special penalty of wickedness; and therefore 
the threats of death, directed against particular 
acts of wickedness, can never be rationally re- 
garded as having reference to any thing but sud- 
den, premature, and violent death. That "the 
wicked shall not live out half their days," is an 
assurance, repeated in many forms and in a great 
variety of ways, in the Old Testament Scrip- 
tures, 



152 Shedl 

In this point of view it is possible, I concede, 
to interpret all the texts which exhibit Sheol as 
having a reference merely to the grave; and there- 
fore it is possible to interpret such ones as Prov. 
v. 5, ix. 18, and xxiii. 14, as designating a death 
violent and premature, inflicted by the hand of 
heaven. 

After all, I cannot but feel inclined to believe 
that the Hebrew, who employed Sheol in this 
way, did of course unite with this sense of it the 
idea of misery consequent upon such premature and 
violent death. Happy or miserable, after death, 
the Hebrews must have supposed every one to be. 
"What, then, was to be the state of him whose 
wickedness was such as to bring sudden and pre- 
mature death upon him ? Surely it cannot well 
be supposed that the Hebrews believed such a 
one would be happy after death. 

When I say that the Hebrews believed men 
would be happy or miserable after death, I do 
not mean to aver that they had those distinct and 
definite notions on this subject which we of the 
present day have. We should never forget that 
it is the glorious pre-eminence of the gospel to 
have " brought life and immortality to light." 
Christians too often forget this, while reasoning 
from the Old Testament. But, then, to suppose 



A Place of Punishment. 153 

that the Jews had no idea of a future state of 
retribution, is to suppose them to be destitute of 
the very first principles of even natural religion ; 
for " he who cometh unto God must believe that 
he is, and that he is the rewarder of those that 
diligently seek him." 

On the whole, the balance seems decidedly to 
be in favor of the idea that by usage Sheol, in 
some cases, did convey the idea of future misery, 
as connected with the sudden and violent death 
of the w T icked. And this idea may be connected 
with a considerable number of passages among 
the examples adduced under the first head above. 

The meaning of Sheol which lies upon the face 
of the sacred record (if I may thus speak) is in- 
deed that of grave, sepulchre, under-world; as I 
have given it in the general recension of the pas- 
sages. But that the Hebrew might connect, nay, 
that he probably did connect, the idea of conse- 
quential misery with that of violent, sudden, and 
premature death, cannot be rendered improbable. 

Indeed, it is very difficult to render it impro- 
bable, when we add to the texts above cited — viz., 
Job xxi. 13; Ps. ix. 17 (18) ; Prov. v. 5, ix. 18, 
xxiii. 14 — others which seem to be of the like 
nature; e.g. 

Prov. vii. 27, Her house is the way to Sheol ; 



154 Bhedl 

going down to the chambers of death: comp. 
Prov. v. 5, ix. 18. 

Prov. xv. 24, The way of life is above to the 
wise, that he may depart from Sheol beneath. 
The most natural meaning of this is : "The way 
of life is that which conducts to happiness above, 
where God dwells; and by pursuing this, one 
escapes Sheol, or the world of misery beneath." 

Let any one now, in addition to these texts, 
carefully inspect such passages as Num. xvi. 30, 
xvi. 33; Deut. xxxii. 22; 1 Kings ii. 6, ii. 9; Ps. 
xlix. 14, 15; Is. v. 14, and then say whether the 
Hebrew, believing in a state of future retribution, 
did not connect such language, in his own thoughts, 
with the apprehension of future misery in regard 
to those of whom he thus spake, 

I am indeed far from coinciding with those 
who find the nature of a future world as fully 
and plainly revealed in the Old Testament as in 
the New. But I am equally far from those who 
do not find it at all intimated there. Both these 
positions are extremes, and, as such, they should 
be avoided by every considerate inquirer. 

On the whole, it is to be regretted that our 
English translation has given occasion to the re- 
marks that those who made it have intended to im- 
pose on their readers, in any case, a sense different 



A Place of Punishment 155 

from that of the original Hebrew. The inconstancy 
with which they have rendered Sheol, even in 
cases of the same nature, must obviously afford 
some apparent ground for this objection against 
their version of it. But I cannot persuade my- 
self that men of so much integrity as the trans- 
lators plainly were, and, I may add, of so much 
critical skill and acumen also, would undertake 
to mislead their readers in any point, where it is 
so easy to make corrections, I am much more 
inclined to believe that in their day the word 
hell had not acquired, so exclusively as at present, 
the meaning of world of future misery. There is 
plain evidence of this in what is called the 
Apostles' Creed, which says of Christ (after his 
crucifixion) that "he descended into hell." 
Surely the Protestant English Church did not 
mean to aver that the soul of Christ went to the 
world of woe, nor that it went to Purgatory. 
They did not believe either of these doctrines. 
Sell, then, means, in this document, the under- 
world, the world of the dead. And so it has been 
construed by the most intelligent critics of the 
English Church. 

With this view of the meaning of hell, as em- 
ployed in past times, we may easily account for 
it, why it has been so often employed as the 



156 Popular Views of Sheol. 

translation of Sheol. This view of the subject, 
also, enables us to acquit the translators of any 
collusion in regard to this word; and to acquit 
them in this respect, does seem to be an act of 
simple justice, due to their ability, their integrity, 
and uprightness. 

The sum of the evidence from the Old Testament 
in regard to Shedl, is, that the Hebrews did 

PROBABLY, IN SOME CASES, CONNECT WITH THE 
USE OF THIS WORD THE IDEA OF MISERY SUB- 
SEQUENT TO THE DEATH OF THE BODY. It seems 

to me that we can safely believe this ; and to aver 
more than this would be somewhat hazardous, 
when all the examples of the word are duly con- 
sidered. 



III. POPULAR VIEWS OF SHEOL, 

To complete the view of She6l here, I must beg 
leave to add a few suggestions on the popular ideas 
of the Hebrews respecting the nature of the 
under-world in general. These may serve to ex- 
plain some passages of the Old Testament, which, 
to say the least, must appear somewhat peculiar, 
unless the popular notions respecting Sheol are 
well understood. 



Popular Views of Shedl. 157 

The usual method, in which the Hebrews and 
almost all other ancient nations disposed of the 
dead bodies of men, was to bury them in the earth. 
Here they were consumed. From the grave none 
ever returned to greet their friends among the 
living ; nothing more was ever seen or heard of 
them. 

Still, there has been no nation on earth, so far 
as we know, certainly no one which had made 
any considerable advances in cultivation, which 
has believed that the existence of man entirely 
terminates with his death. The soul, to which 
various forms and modes of existence have been 
assigned, has generally been supposed to survive 
the body, and to exist in a state peculiar to itself 
in many respects, and susceptible of various kinds 
and degrees of joy or of sorrow. 

Popular apprehensions in regard to the state 
of men after death (and these only am I now 
considering) seem to have been very much af- 
fected by the usage of burying corpses in the 
ground, and by the fact that no more is seen or 
heard of men after they are thus buried. 

The desire of immortality seems to constitute 
a part of the instinctive affections of the human 
soul. The belief of immortality is connected in- 
timately with this. But where this belief is che- 

14 



158 Popular Views of 

rished, it seems obviously necessary to assign 
some place to the soul for existence and action. 
Where shall this be? How shall they argue and 
conclude on this subject, who are unenlightened 
by revelation, or who reason merely from the 
impulse of imagination, or from the notice of 
their own senses ? 

History can answer the question how they have 
reasoned. The Egyptians, the Greeks, the Ro- 
mans, and many other nations, have believed in 
the existence of a Hades, of an Infernus, i.e. of 
an under-world, of a region of the dead, in which 
their departed friends lived and acted. Among 
each nation, popular superstition or imagination 
has attached peculiarities of their own to this 
under-world, or region of the dead; but the 
general features of it are alike among all. 

The popular views of the Hebrews appear, in 
many respects, to have been of the like nature. 
With them, the grave and Sheol are often re- 
garded as one and the same, when they designed 
merely to describe the decease of their friends 
and their departure to another world. But at 
other times Sheol was, as we have seen above, 
taken in a wider sense than that of grave merely ; 
it designated the world of the dead, the region of 
0*^3*1 , i.e. of umbrce or ghosts. It was considered 



Shedl. 159 

as a vast and wide domain or region, of which 
the grave seems to have been as it were only a 
part, or a kind of entrance-way. It appears to 
have been regarded as extending deep down in 
the earth, even to its lowest abysses. This was 
not unnatural. In the present life, men inhabit 
a region over which the air extends indefinitely. 
Imagination formed something like this, for those 
who were placed in the sepulchre. A region 
deep and wide existed all around them. In this 
boundless region lived, and moved (at times), the 
manes of departed friends. To this they assigned 
many qualities or attributes, some of which will 
now be briefly noticed. 

(1.) Sheol is a place from which none ever 
return. 

So Job vii. 9, As the cloud is consumed and 
vanisheth away, so he that goeth down to the 
grave shall come up no more. He shall return 
no more to his house, neither shall his place know 
him any more. 2 Sam. xii. 23, Now he is dead, 
wherefore should I fast ? Can I bring him back 
again ? I shall go to him, but he shall not return 
to me. 

(2.) It devours or consumes the bodies laid 
in it. 

Job xxiv. 19, Drought and heat consume the 



160 Popular Views of 

snow-waters ; so doth the grave those who have 
sinned. Ps. xlix. 14, Like sheep they are laid in 
the grave ; death shall feed on them ; . . . their 
beauty shall consume in the grave. 

(3.) Sheol is a place of inaction and silence. 

Occasionally this idea is departed from, e.g. Is. 
xiv. 9, and in some other places. The amount 
of it seems to be that in general Sheol is re- 
presented as a place of entire inactivity and 
silence; e.g. 

Ps. vi. 6, In death there is no remembrance of 
thee ; in the grave who shall give thee thanks ? 
Ps. xxxi. 17 (18), Let them be silent in the grave. 
1 Sam. ii. 9, The wicked shall be silent in dark- 
ness. Ps. cxv. 17, The dead praise not the Lord; 
neither any that go down into silence. Is. xxxviii. 
18, For the grave cannot praise thee; death can- 
not celebrate thee. Ecc. ix. 10, For there is no 
work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in 
the grave whither thou goest. 

(4.) Sheol extends deep into the recesses of 
the earth ; yea, as deep as the heavens are high 
above it. 

Job xi. 8, It is high as heaven, what canst thou 
do ? Deeper than Sheol, what canst thou know ? 
Ezek. xxxi. 15, Thus saith the Lord God, In the 
day when he [the king of Egypt] went down to 



ShedL 161 

Sheol, I caused a mourning, I made the abyss 
to cover him ; i.e. Sheol was below the abyss of 
the ocean. So Jonah ii. 2 (3), Out of the belly of 
Sheol did I cry unto thee ; i.e. from the deep 
abysses of the sea (while in the belly of the whale) 
did I cry unto thee. 

Sheol is the common antithesis of heaven. 
Amos ix. 2, Though they dig into Sheol, thence 
shall my hand take them ; though they climb up 
to heaven, thence will I bring them down. Deut. 
xxxii. 22, A fire is kindled in mine anger, which 
shall burn to the lowest Sheol. Ps. cxxxix. 8, If 
I ascend up into heaven, thou art there; if I 
make my bed in Sheol, behold, thou art there. 

(5.) Sheol is a place of utter and perpetual 
darkness and gloom. 

Job x. 21, 22, Before I go whence I shall not 
return ; even to the land of darkness and the 
shadow of death ; a land of darkness, as darkness 
itself, and of the shadow of death, without any 
order ; where even the light is darkness ; i.e. 
where even the day is like our midnight. The 
vivid nature of the imagery is very striking. 

(6.) Here dwell the ghosts or Manes of deceased 
men. 

Ps. lxxxviii. 10 (11), Wilt thou show wonders 
to the dead ? Shall the Manes, DW3*"), arise and 

14* 



162 Popular Views of 

praise thee ? i.e. shall the ghosts from the under- 
world rise up to life and praise thee ? Prov. ii. 

18, For her house inclineth unto death ; and her 
paths unto the ghosts, i.e. the place where the 
ghosts dwell. Prov. ix. 18, He knoweth not that 
the ghosts are there ; and that her guests are in 
the depths of Sheol. Prov. xxi. 16, The man that 
wandereth out of the way of understanding, shall 
remain in the congregation of ghosts. Is. xiv. 9, 
Sheol from beneath is moved, to meet thee at thy 
coming ; it stirreth up the ghosts for thee. 

That D'K£ te l designates deceased persons, is per- 
fectly clear, not only from the texts just cited, but 
from the following passages, — viz., Is. xxvi. 14, 
They are dead, they shall not live, they are ghosts, 
Manes [i.e. in a state of decease, having a post- 
mortem existence], they shall not rise. Is. xxvi. 

19, Thy dead men shall live; . . . the earth shall 
cast out her ghosts. 

The state of the Manes is strongly characterized 
by the Hebrew name given to them,- — viz. D^NiD*"!? 
the plural of IHTS = H£n> which means weak, 
feeble, powerless; an idea almost of course connected 
with the impression which the mind receives from 
examining the powerless state of dead bodies. 
Accordingly, in Is. xiv. 10, the ghosts of Sheol 
are represented as saying to the King of Babylon, 



Shedl 163 

as he comes down to them, "Art thou too become 
weak like us ?" 

These passages show, very clearly, a strong 
resemblance in the popular ideas of Sheol among 
the Hebrews, to those of the Greeks and Komans 
in regard to Hades. 

(7.) Sheol is sometimes personified, and repre- 
sented as an insatiable monster, always devouring 
without remorse or distinction ; e.g. 

Is. v. 14, Therefore Sheol hath enlarged her- 
self, and opened wide her mouth without mea- 
sure. Prov. xxvii. 20, Sheol and destruction are 
never satisfied. Prov. xxx. 15, 16, Three things 
are never satisfied: . . . Sheol, the barren womb, 
etc. Prov. i. 12, Let us swallow them up alive, 
like She6l. 

(8.) Shedl, in common and popular language, 
is the world or region to which both the right- 
eous and the wicked go after death. 

Thus Abraham was gathered to his people, 
Gen. xxv. 8 ; so also was Isaac, Gen. xxxv. 29 ; 
Jacob, Gen. xlix. 29 ; Aaron, Num. xx. 26 ; Moses, 
Deut. xxxii. 50. The generation contemporary 
with Joshua were gathered to their fathers, Judg. 
ii. 10. 

In Gen. xxxvii. 35, Jacob is represented as say- 
ing, " I will go down to Sheol, unto my son, mourn- 



164 Popular Views of 

ing." David often prays to be delivered from 
Sheol, and often describes the wicked as being 
sent to Sheol. The passages have all been re- 
peated above, and are too plain to need repetition 
here. 

I might add some other minute particulars, 
respecting the popular modes of representing 
Sheol, or the region of the dead ; but these em- 
brace the most important. On these I shall now 
subjoin a few remarks. 

REMARKS ON THE POPULAR VIEWS OF SHEOL. 

First The popular representations of this na- 
ture, to which reference is so frequently made in 
Scriptures, are not the proper ground of esti- 
mating the knowledge or belief of enlightened 
Hebrews respecting a future state. 

It seems sufficiently plain that as the Hebrews 
believed God to be the rewarder of the right- 
eous, and that he would inflict punishment on the 
wicked, they could not well suppose that after 
death all would in every respect share one common 
lot. So Ps. xvii. 15, As for me, I shall behold 
thy face in righteousness ; I shall be satisfied 
when I awake in thy likeness. Here the Psalmist 
refers to a distinction "to be made between himself 
and the prosperous wicked who have a full portion 



Shedl. 165 

in the present world. Consequently, the distinc- 
tion is not in matters of worldly good; but in 
something after the present life. So Ps. xvi. 11, 
In thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right 
hand are pleasures for evermore. 

If any one should wonder how the representa- 
tions of Sheol above noticed should be made in the 
Scriptures, let him well consider the nature of the 
popular methods of representation so often adopted 
there. In the Scriptures, the sun is represented 
as rising and setting, as are also the moon and 
stars. The earth is an extended plain. The 
heavens are a solid arch extended over the earth, 
embosoming the stores of water which supply the 
rain, and pouring this down through the windows 
in the vault above. All these and very many 
other things are represented simply as they present 
themselves to the eye. The sacred writers did 
not undertake to teach geography or astronomy. 
"Whenever they have occasion to refer to any 
objects of this nature, they do it merely in the 
popular way. 

Suppose, now, that any one should undertake, 
on this account, to maintain that the earth is not 
a globe, and to deny the revolution of it, or of 
the heavenly bodies ; and all this, on the autho- 
rity of Scripture? The times have been, we 



166 Popular Views of 

know, when this was done; but we trust such 
times are passed away, no more to return. 

In the same manner would I reason, in regard 
to the popular representations of Sheol in the 
Bible. Many of these are strictly correct, as any 
one may see by reviewing the particulars above 
described. But others have no foundation in 
point of fact. A deep region beneath, peopled 
with ghosts, is what we do not believe in. 

Nor is there any more certainty that it is true, 
because this method of speaking about it in the 
Scriptures is adopted, than that the sun goes 
round the earth, because they speak of it as doing so. 

In most cases, it is the language of poetry 
which employs the popular methods of representa- 
tion. It is poetry which gives a kind of life and 
animation to the inhabitants of the under-world. 
Poetry personifies that world. So in Is. v. 14, 
Prov. xxvii. 20, xxx. 15, 16, and i. 12. Above 
all is this the case in that most striking passage 
in Is. xiv. 9-20, in which all commentators are 
compelled to admit a fictitious or imaginary cos- 
tume. Here the ghosts rise up from their places 
of repose, and meet and insult the King of Ba- 
bylon, and exult over his fall. All is life and 
animation when he goes down into the under- 
world. 



Sheol. 167 

Yet who was ever misled by this passage, and 
induced to regard it as a passage to be literally 
understood ? But if this be very plain, then are 
other passages of a nature in any respect similar, 
equally plain also. To construe them literally, 
and then to build on them arguments in order 
to show that the Hebrews had no more definite 
views of a future world or of retribution than the 
heathen, is greatly to abuse the obvious principles 
of interpretation. 

Secondly. Another remark which I cannot for- 
bear to make is, that to represent the Old Testa- 
ment as determining the future state, either of 
the righteous or of the wicked, with the same 
clearness and fulness as the New Testament does, 
savors either of prejudice, or of an imperfect 
acquaintance with the Jewish sacred records. 
Where is the specific difference between the future 
state of the righteous and the wicked, fully set 
forth in the Hebrew Scriptures ? Where are the 
separate abodes in Sheol for each particularly 
described? I know not; nor do I believe any 
one can inform me. 

In the New Testament all is clear. u Life and 
immortality are brought to light by the gospel." 

It would be a subject of curious and interesting 
inquiry, here, to pursue the comparison of the 



168 General Conclusion. 

popular notions of the Hebrews respecting Sheol, 
with those of the Greeks as exhibited in the 
Odyssey and those of the Romans as exhibited in 
the iEneid, Many striking traits of resemblance 
could easily be pointed out. But it would lead 
me too far from my present object, to pursue such 
a course at length; and I must relinquish it to 
those who have more leisure for such an under- 
taking. In the mean time, it is proper to suggest, 
here, that in the view which is to be taken of 
Hades in the subsequent pages, the general ideas 
of the Greeks and Romans relative to the under- 
world must necessarily be laid before the reader. 



IV. GENERAL CONCLUSION. 

As has been already intimated above, this is, 
that, while the Old Testament employs 

SHEOL, IN MOST CASES, TO DESIGNATE THE 
GRAVE, THE REGION OF THE DEAD, THE PLACE 
OF DEPARTED SPIRITS, IT EMPLOYS IT ALSO, IN 
SOME CASES, TO DESIGNATE ALONG WITH THIS 
IDEA THE ADJUNCT ONE OF PLACE OF MISERY, 
PLACE OF PUNISHMENT, REGION OF WOE. In 

this respect it accords, as we shall hereafter see, 
fully with the New Testament use of Hades. 
That neither the place of punishment nor of 



General Conclusion. 169 

happiness, after death, is as fully and plainly 
developed in the Old Testament as in the New, 
will not be called in question by any candid and 
intelligent reader of the Bible. But that the 
people of God, in ancient times, had no ideas of 
future happiness or misery, and no words by 
which these ideas were conveyed, can be shown 
only when it is proved that those who enjoyed 
a revelation from heaven were more ignorant 
than their heathen neighbors. 



15 



c AIAHI or 'AIAHI. 



I. CLASSICAL SENSE OF THE WORD. 

Homer employs this word, throughout his 
poems, as the proper name of Pluto, the ima- 
ginary god of the under-world, among the Greeks 
and Romans. Later writers, both in poetry and 
prose, employ it likewise to designate the region, 
place, state, or condition of the dead; the world 
beneath, or under-world; the grave, death, or the 
state of death. As an example of this last mean- 
ing (the only one about which a classical reader 
will have any doubt) may be cited the phrases 
adr^ TibvTLOQ, death by tlie sea, adrjt; (pbvtoq, death 
by murder. The phrase e*c (Iv) 'Atdao or Acdou, 
also ere (ec) 'Atdao and Acdou, often occurs ; but it 
is elliptical in the Greek, and stands for iv Acdou 
olxw and sic; ATdou ocx.ov, — viz., the house or resi- 
dence of Pluto. 

In the oldest Greek writers, we find Hades 
distinguished from Erebus and Cimmeria. Cim- 
meria, or Cimmerium, was an imaginary place, 

170 



Meaning of Hades. 171 

near the island of Aeea, which island lay off the 
western coast of Sicily, and was the fabled abode 
of Circe and her companions, among whom Ulys- 
ses and his friends dwelt for some time on his 
return from Troy. Homer represents Ulysses 
as setting out from Aeea, and, after one day's sail, 
as arriving at Cimmeria, on " the extremity of 
the fathomless ocean," Odyss. XI. 13. Here they 
found regions "covered with darkness and clouds; 
nor does the sun shining with his beams ever look 
upon them, neither when he mounts the starry 
sky, nor when he retires back from heaven to the 
earth; but deadly night broods over wretched 
mortals." Odyss. XI. 16-19. 

In this Cimmerian region (which Pliny places 
near to the Lucrine Lake and Avernus), Ulysses 
is represented by the poet as performing the sacred 
rites which evoked the Manes of the dead from 
Hades, who appeared before him, and successively 
conversed with him. Once, indeed, Odyss. XI. 
474, Homer seems to represent Ulysses as having 
gone down into Hades ; for the shade of Achilles 
asks him, " Why hast thou dared to come down 
into Hades ?" But still the picture in general is 
such that we are compelled to understand this 
as meaning the precincts of Hades ; for Proser- 
pine and Pluto are represented as sending the 



172 Meaning of 

Manes from their abode to converse with Ulysses; 
and Hercules, after conversing with him, is repre- 
sented as " returning again to the house of Pluto/' 
Odyss. XI. 626. 

Beyond this embouchure of Hades (which 
seems to have been considered as a deep valley or 
cavity where no light ever comes, but still on the 
surface of the earth), there lay another region 
of more intense gloom and darkness, w^hich the 
Greeks called * Epefio<; (comp. the Hebrew D*!^ 
nighty darkness). This was not, as some of our 
lexicons represent it, the abode of departed souls; 
but was only an intermediate region, under the 
surface of the earth, and lying between this and 
Hades, which was placed deeper down. Erebus 
is only a place of transition to Hades, from 
which Homer expressly distinguishes it, II. VIII, 
368. 

Last and lowest of all was Hades, which is 
subdivided into the upper and lower. In the 
upper part are the Elysian fields, the abode of 
the good ; and beneath these, i.e. in the deepest 
dungeon, in the bowels of the earth, is Tartarus, 
the place of punishment for the wicked, answer- 
ing, in some respects, to the Gehenna of the 
Hebrews. Later Greek authors do not always 
observe the distinctions which are here presented, 



Hades. 173 

but frequently confound more or less of them in 
a good degree ; as do also the Latin writers. 

Virgil, in his iEneid, Book VI., has given a 
vivid picture of Orcus or Hades. It is more 
adapted, however, to convey the fancies of his 
poetic imagination than it is to convey an exact 
idea of the more ancient and general opinions of 
the Greeks in respect to Hades. He loses sight 
in some measure of the views of Homer, and is 
more intent on making out a striking picture 
than on giving an exact account of tradition. 

Such is the classical view of Hades and its 
precincts. As to the state of the Manes or Um- 
brae who dwelt in Hades, it may be represented 
by a few words. 

When the shade of Achilles meets Ulysses, at 
the mouth of Hades, he addresses him thus: — 
" Noble son of Laertes, wily Ulysses, undaunted ! 
What deeds still greater are you devising in your 
mind? How is it that you have dared to come 
down to Hades, where the dead dwell, who are 
incapable of forming any plans, the mere resem- 
blances of busy mortals?" Odyss. XI. 472-475. 

The words &v&a re vexpo) acppadiez voiooat y 
Cowper has translated, 

Where the shadows of the dead, 

Forms without intellect, alone reside. 
15* 



174 Meaning of 

But he has overlooked the antithesis lying in 
d<ppa3es<z, incapable of forming or of devising and 
executing plans. The idea thus conveyed is 
directly the opposite of what Ulysses was doing, 
and to which Achilles adverts when he asks, 
"What deeds still greater are you devising in 
your mind ?" The Manes are affirmed by him 
to be incapable of devising and executing any 
thing of this nature. 

To men who placed the greatest happiness 
of life in action, as did the ancient Greeks, this 
would present a gloomy picture indeed of the 
state of souls in Hades. 

Ulysses, in his reply to Achilles, seeks to com- 
fort him by reminding him of his former great- 
ness. To all this, the gloomy chief replies, — 

Hen own' d Ulysses ! think not death a theme 
Of consolation ; I had rather live 
The servile hind for hire, and eat the bread 
Of some man scantily himself sustained, 
Than sovereign empire hold o'er all the shades. 

Cowper's Odyss. XI. 572-597; Greek Original, 
XI. 487-490. * 

To the mind of a Greek, this must be a picture 
of consummate wretchedness. 

The picture which Virgil gives is not less 



Hades. 175 

appalling. He describes the Manes and the en- 
trance to their habitation as 

" Umbrae silentes; 

loca nocte tacentia late ; 

res alta terr£ et caligine mersas ; 

primisque in faucibus Orci, 

Luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curse ; 
Pallentesque habitant Morbi, tristisque Senectus, 
Et Metus, et inalesuada Fames, ac turpis Egestas, 
Terribiles visu formse ; Letumque, Labosque ; 
Turn consanguineus Leti Sopor, et mala mentis 
Gaudia, mortiferumque adverso in limine Bellum 
Ferreique Eumenidum thalami, et Discordia demens, 
Vipereum crinem vittis in exeruentis." 

Maeid, VI. 263-280. 

Afterwards (VI. 425 seq.) Virgil describes the 
progress of Eneas in the region of Hades, in 
terms which show what a doleful place he thought 
it to be. However, when he brings his hero to 
Elysium, to the locos Icetos, et amcena vireta, sedes- 
que beatas (VI. 637 seq.), he seems to make some- 
thing more substantial out of them than can be 
found in any of the preceding heathen writers. 
But it is plainly the fancy of the poet which does 
this, and not the tradition of the Greek and Ro- 
man nations. 

Hades, then, in the view of the Greeks and 
Romans, was the under-world, the world of the 
dead, a place deep in the earth, dark, cheerless j 



176 Meaning of 

where every thing was unsubstantial and sha- 
dowy. The Manes were neither body nor spirit, 
but something intermediate, not palpable to any 
of the senses, except to the sight and hearing ; 
pursuing the mere shadows of their occupations 
on earth, and incapable of any plans, enjoyments, 
or satisfaction, which were substantial. Of the 
Elysium of Virgil, Homer knows little or nothing ; 
and it is sufficiently plain that it is principally 
the offspring of his own imagination. 

II. HADES AS USED BY THE SACRED WRITERS. 

Before the New Testament was written, the 
translators of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, 
i.e. " the Seventy," as they are usually called, had 
made very frequent use of the word qidrjz, in order 

to translate 71KC>. They have done this in no 
less than sixty instances out of the sixty-three in 

which the word 71KJJ* is employed in the Hebrew 
original. Twice they have rendered the same 
Hebrew word by &dvaro$, death, — viz., 2 Sam. xxii. 
6, Prov. xxiii. 14, — and once by fto&poz, pit, Ezek. 
xxxii. 19 (21). 

That they employ Hades in a few other cases, 
is also true. Once they employ it to translate 
*VD IJDKj stones of the pit, tomb, grave, Is. xiv. 



Hades. 177 

19; twice, to translate PlOVl, silence, — viz., Ps. 

xciii. 17, cxiii. 26; and once, to translate filp/tf, 
death-shade, umbra mortis, Job xxxviii. 18. 

In Is. xxxviii. 18, *VQ *TlVj ^ descenders 
into the pit, is rendered ol e» adou. In Prov. xiv. 
12, and xvi. 25, T\)t2 *3Tl, the ways of death, is 
rendered ere nuftfieva adou, into the depths of Hades. 

These are all the instances in which it occurs 
in the Septuagint version. The sense which these 
translators affixed to it is most evidently the 
same as the Hebrews affixed to the word Sheol. 
For this, I must remit the reader to the preceding 
dissertation, where it has been amply discussed. 

In the Apocrypha, I find the word employed 
sixteen times ; and in all cases in a manner that 
corresponds entirely with the use of She6l. 

We are prepared, then, to expect the like use 
of Hades in the New Testament. Accordingly, 
we here find it sometimes employed in almost or 
quite a literal sense, i.e. as meaning world beneath, 
under-world; sometimes in a sense similar to that 
of Oreus or Infernus, i.e. the place of departed 
souls ; and sometimes in the sense of kingdom or 
region of the dead, like Sheol in Is. xiv. 9, and 
other passages. 



178 Meaning of 

1. Hades designates the under-world, subterra- 
nean regions simply, in opposition to the regions 
above the earth. E.g. 

Matt. xi. 23, Thou, Capernaum, which art ex- 
alted to heaven, i.e. very highly (alluding probably 
to its site on a lofty hill), shalt be brought down 
to Hades, to the under-world, i.e. very low. I ad- 
mit that the sense is probably a spiritual one here, 
i.e. that the Saviour means to say that Capernaum, 
which had been so greatly exalted in point of 
privileges and had so signally abused them, should 
be made a conspicuous monument of punitive 
justice. But, still, the source of the imagery, 
and the natural and primary explanation of the 
words, are not affected by this. 

Luke x. 15, the same words, in the same sense. 



2. Hades signifies the region of the dead, the 
domains of death, or of [him who hath the power 
of death] Satan. 

Thus, Matt. xvi. 18, Peter is called a rock; and 
on this rock the church is to be built, " and the 
gates of Hades shall not prevail against it." The 
world of the dead was supposed, both by the 
Hebrews and Greeks, to have bars or gates which 
none could open, i.e. which were strong or invin- 



Hades. 179 

cible. The reason or ground of this figure was, 
that no one ever returned who once went there. 
The phrase " gates of Hades" may be found in 
3 Mace. v. 51 ; and "gates of death" in Ps. ix. 13, 
cvii. 18; Is. xxxviii. 10. The heathen writers 
also employ the like phrase; e.g. Euripides, Al- 
cest. 124; iEschylus, Agamemn. 1300; Lucre- 
tius, III. 7. These gates, moreover, are repre- 
sented by them as most firm and well guarded, 
Iliad, IX, 312; Odyss. XI. 276: comp. Job 
xxxviii. 17. 

The meaning of the phrase in question, then, 
seems to be, "the empire of death shall never 
prevail over the church," i.e. the church shall 
never cease or be extinguished. That gates of 
Hades stands, by synecdoche, for the region or 
empire of Hades, is only a common case of rhe- 
torical usage. Strong and invincible as Hades 
is, it is not to prevail over the church. This will 
ever live and flourish ; or, it will never die. 

As an illustration of the idea of strength, to 
which allusion is made in the word Hades, one 
may quote the noted line in Petronius, Sat. 62, 

" Ecce autem miles, fortis tanquam Orcus." 

In the Apocalypse, the imagery is more spe- 
cific with regard to Hades. The writer of this 



180 Meaning of 

book not only represents Hades as the region or 
kingdom of the dead, but also represents death 
as being king over this region, and directing and 
controlling those who dwell in it. Of this tenor 
are all the examples of the use of Hades in this 
book; e.g. 

Rev. i. 18, 1 have the keys of death and Hades. 
The meaning of this is rendered plain by the 
context which immediately precedes. The Saviour 
says, " I live, but was dead ; yea, behold ! I live 
for ever and ever; for I have the keys of death 
and Hades ;" i.e. mine is the power to unlock the 
gates of Hades, to open the doors of this prison 
from which none could escape. I have entered 
the region of Hades (comp. Acts ii. 17, 31), and 
am come forth living ; yea, in possession of ever- 
lasting life. 

When God addresses Job, and asks, " Have the 
gates of death been opened to thee?" Job xxxviii. 
17, the question implies the utter impossibility 
that any merely mortal power should open them. 
And when Jesus is represented as " having the 
keys of death and Hades," he is, of course, pre- 
sented as clothed with power which nothing can 
control or resist. A special reference, however, 
is made in this language to the fact that Jesus 
had died and risen again ; as he says in John x. 



Hades. 181 

18, "I have power to lay down my life, and I 
have power to resume it." 

Death, which in this passage is tacitly repre- 
sented as the monarch of Hades, is fully exhibited 
as such in other passages of the Apocalypse; e.g. 

Rev. vi. 8, Lo! a pale horse, and he who sat 
upon him was named Death, and Hades followed 
after him. Here is the king of the empire of 
the dead, with his subjects in his train, They 
are a part of the fearful battle-array which the 
opening of the seven seals summons together and 
puts in readiness to fight "the great battle of God 
Almighty." Hades, in this passage, stands for 
the inhabitants of Hades ; just as in innumerable 
cases we employ the name of a country in order 
to designate the inhabitants of the same. 

It would be turning aside from my present 
purpose to descant on the magnificent and ap- 
palling scenery presented in Rev. vii. If any 
one can read this chapter without being deeply 
impressed and affected with the vivid and power- 
ful imagination of the writer, he is a very unfit 
person to be a commentator on this book. 

Rev. xx. 13, Death and Hades gave up the 
dead which were in them ; i.e. the king over the 
region of the dead, and his empire also, gave up 
the dead who were under his control or within 

16 



182 Meaning of 

its boundaries. The meaning of the writer is 
that all the dead were raised to life, and summoned 
to appear before the tribunal of the Supreme 
Judge of the universe. 

Rev. xx. 14, And death and Hades were cast 
into the lake of fire ; this is the second death. 
Here the king of Hades, and Hades itself, i.e. the 
region or domains of death, are represented as 
cast into the burning lake. The general judg- 
ment being now come, mortality having now been 
brought to a close, the tyrant death, and his do- 
mains along with him, are represented as cast into 
the burning lake, as objects of abhorrence and of 
indignation. They are no more to exercise any 
power over the human race. 

Such is the representation of Hades in the 
Apocalypse. It is the genuine Sheol of the 
Hebrews; with the exception, perhaps, that the 
Hebrew sacred books have nowhere represented 
Hades as having a king over it. The passage 
in Is. xxviii. 15 is indeed susceptible of being 
understood so as to accord exactly with the repre- 
sentation in the Apocalypse, "We have made a 
covenant with death, and with Sheol are we at 
agreement ;" comp. Hos. xiii. 14. But the want 
of support from analogy in the Old Testament 
leads me to construe Sheol, here, as meaning simply 



Hades. 183 

grave or region of the dead, and as being merely 
a parallelism of death* 



3. Very nearly allied to No. 2, and a species 
of the same genus, is the meaning grave, sepul- 
chre, depository of the dead, which Hades some- 
times has. 

1 Cor. xv. 55, O grave! Hades, where is thy 
victory ? So our common version here ; and well 
enough, because the question which the writer puts 
has respect to the resurrection of the dead. Still, 
if the passage " O death ! where is thy sting ? O 
grave! where is thy victory ?" should be con- 
strued in such a manner as fidvaroz and adr^ are 
to be construed throughout the Apocalypse, the 
sense would be perfectly good; e.g. "King of 
terrors ! where is thy triumph ? Empire of the 
dead ! where is thy victory ?" 

Acts ii. 27, Thou wilt not leave my soul [me] 
in Hades, nor suffer thy Holy One to see cor- 
ruption ; Le. thou wilt not leave me in the grave 
or region of the dead, nor suffer my body to putrefy 
there. See on Sheol above, under Ps. xvi. 10. 

Acts ii. 31, His soul [he] was not left in Hades, 
nor did his flesh see corruption. 

Both these passages have their basis in Ps. xvi. 



184 Meaning of 

10; and Hades here evidently has the same sense 
as Shedl there. 



4. Hades has the sense of Tartarus in one 
passage. — viz., the region of woe or punishment. 

Luke xvi. 23, In Hades he lifted up his eyes, 
being in torments. That in the heathen Hades 
was a Tartarus, a place of punishment and suffer- 
ing, is too well known to need illustration and 
proof on the present occasion. More will be said 
on this point, when I come to treat of Tartarus. 
That in Hades, according to the views of the 
Hebrews, and of Jesus himself, there was a place 
of torment, is put out of all question by the 
passage now before us. 

Taking this to be correct, we may now look 
back and see that the remarks made above on 
the probable meaning of Sheol* receive much 
confirmation, and are rendered very probable, by 
the passage before us. 



5. REMARKS ON THE USE OF HADES IN THE 
SCRIPTURES. 

These are all the passages in which Hades is 
employed in the New Testament. From none of 

* Heads 3 and 4 of Shedl. 



Hades. 185 

these can we gather that the Jews in our Saviour's 
time made use of the word Hades as indicating 
expressly the abode of the righteous, as well as 
of the wicked. The passage in Rev. xx. 13, 14, 
may appear somewhat dubious, however, in respect 
to this point ; and the passage in 1 Cor. xv. 55 
implies a triumph of the righteous, at their resur- 
rection, over Hades ; which would seem to imply 
that for a time they had been subjected to its 
dominion. This dominion, however, need not be 
interpreted as meaning any thing more than that 
they have been subjected to mortality, i.e. to death. 

It may also be remarked that as, in the Old 
Testament, Sheol is the place to which the right- 
eous go as well as the wicked ; and as the Saviour, 
subsequently to his death, is represented as being 
in Hades, Ps. xvi. 10 ; Acts ii. 27, 31 ; so it is not 
improbable that the general conception of Hades, 
as meaning the region of the dead, comprised 
both an Elysium and a Tartarus (to speak in 
classical language), or a state of happiness and a 
state of misery. 

Such being the case, the question whether those 
who go to Hades will be happy or miserable there, 
depends of course on the question whether they 
are righteous or wicked, whether they deserve 
reward or punishment. Admitting that an exist- 

16* 



186 Meaning of 

ence in Hades implies a state which is capable 
either of happiness or of misery, is admitting, of 
course, that the sinner may be " in torments" while 
in Hades ; and that Dives was in such a state, is 
made certain by Luke xvi. 23. 

That the Hebrews used the Greek word Hades, 
so as to correspond in general with their Sheol, 
is quite plain from the above investigations. We 
can no more argue that Hades, as used by them, 
did in all respects mean the same as it did among 
the Greeks, than we can argue in like manner 
in regard to the use of the words #£oc, ayyekos, 
ocorrjpy datjucov, dcdfioXo$ y obpavoq, etc. A most 
important philological consideration, and one, I 
may add, which is very often overlooked in the 
partial and party examinations to which the 
Scriptures are not unfrequently subjected. 

I add one more remark, before closing this 
topic. Whatever the state of either the righteous 
or the wicked may be whilst in Hades, Le. under 
the dominion of death, that state will certainly 
cease, and be exchanged for another, at the gene- 
ral resurrection. So we are most plainly taught 
in Rev. xx* 13, 14. The wicked will then be 
doomed to a second death, more dreadful than the 
first, Rev. xxi. 8, 9, comp. Rev. xx. 8, 9, also 
Rev. xx. 14, 15. 



Tartarus. 187 

I am entirely unable, then, to perceive how it 
can be proved that there will be no future punish- 
ment, by showing that Hades means the grave, 
the region of the dead, or the state of the dead, 
the empire of death. This empire is to cease, 
and another state is to succeed, from which the 
Scriptures say nothing (at least I am able to find 
nothing) in regard to deliverance. When it can 
be shown that there is deliverance from "the lake 
of fire, which is the second death" then something 
will be done to affect the question under con- 
sideration,, Until then, I see not how we can 
avoid the conclusion that " the smoke of future 
torment will ascend up for ever and ever," 



TAPTAPOZ. 



The name Tartarus occurs nowhere in the 
Scriptures. But a denominative verb, rapzapdco, 
which means to send to Tartarus, to confine in 
Tartarus, to punish in Tartarus, occurs in 2 Pet. 
ii. 4. Here it is said that God spared not the 
angels who sinned, but raprapcoaa^, confining 
them in Tartarus, he put them in chains of dark- 
ness, incarcerated for trial or kept for judgment, 



188 Meaning of 

That a place of punishment is here indicated 
by Tartarus, is put beyond all doubt by the con- 
text: "he spared not/' "chains of darkness/' 
"imprisoned for judgment or condemnation." It 
remains only to inquire whether the word is 
susceptible of any other meaning, even according 
to the usus loquendi of the classics. 

In Greek, the word Tartarus is employed to 
designate a supposed subterranean region, as deep 
down below the upper parts of Hades as the earth 
is distant from heaven (Passow). It is occasion- 
ally employed, in the later classic writers, for 
the under-world in general, but in such a connec- 
tion as to show that it is only when writers mean 
to speak of the whole as a region of gloom, that 
they call it Tartarus. It is the place where the 
distinguished objects of Jupiter's vengeance are 
represented as being confined and tormented. It 
is placed in opposition to, or in distinction from, 
Elysium. 

These meanings of the word are so notorious, 
and so familiar to every reader of the classics, 
that I deem it unimportant to dwell upon them. 
I add only that Homer, Iliad IV. 13, uses the 
expression sic zdpzapov pinzw, which is equivalent 
to zapzapoco; Josephus, cont. Apion. ii. 33, uses 
the expression, iv zapzdpw dedyjusvouz. Kazazap- 



Tartarus. 189 

zapoco is also employed by Sextus Ernpir., Hypo- 
typ. III. 24, and by Apollodorus, Biblioth. I. 
1,2. 

There can be no doubt, then, either from clas- 
sical or sacred usage, of the proper meaning of 
zaprapcoaa^. The only question is, to whom 
does it refer ? 

The answer must be, " Primarily to the sinning 
angels." So 2 Pet. ii. 4 shows beyond a doubt. 
But then the nature of the threatening here is 
such that it must be intended for sinful men as 
well as angels. So v. 3 clearly shows. The whole 
strain of the argument is, " If God spared not the 
angels who sinned, but confined them in Tartarus, 
neither will he spare sinners now, but will confine 
them there." If we compare vs. 3, 4, and 17, in 
chapter ii., this conclusion is put beyond any 
reasonable doubt. 

I remark, moreover, that the heathen had no 
apprehension of deliverance from Tartarus. Tan- 
talus, Sisyphus, Ixion, and all others sent there, 
were doomed to endless punishment, in the view 
of the Greeks and Romans. It remains for those 
who deny that the idea of such a punishment was 
attached to the word Tartarus, when it was used 
by the Hebrews, to exhibit some proof that the 
allegation which they make is true. 



190 Meaning of 

But they will tell us, perhaps, that "the word 
Tartarus designates nothing more than an ima- 
ginary place of punishment, among the heathen. 
Such a place as the Greeks and Romans supposed, 
does not in fact exist: therefore we are not to 
conclude, when the word is employed by Peter, 
that it designates any place which has a real 
existence." 

The answer to this is easy. We may allow 
the premises, without in any measure feeling our- 
selves moved to allow the conclusion. Did not 
the Greek Theos designate an imaginary god? 
Were not his heaven and his Elysium imaginary? 
And yet, when a Hebrew writer employs #eoc 
and ohpavo^y does it designate nothing real, and 
nothing different from the idea that a heathen 
Greek expressed by these words? Surely such 
an argument as this can never stand before the 
light of examination. Have we yet to learn, 
after so many able lexicons and commentaries on 
the New Testament Greek have been published, 
that when the Hebrews employed the words of 
this language, they attached to very many of them 
peculiarities of meaning w^hich may be sought 
for in vain in classic authors? Who, that is 
worthy of regard as a scholar, now calls this in 
question ? And if it be true, is there any diffi- 



Gehenna. 191 

culty in supposing that rapzapcoaa^ has a real 
meaning, when used by Peter ? Certainly none. 
Indeed, the connection in which it stands, puts 
this matter beyond fair question. Peter was 
obliged, when he wrote Greek, to use the lan- 
guage as he found it already made. What term, 
then, in order to express the horrors of future 
punishment, could he select from the whole Greek 
language, which was more significant than the 
one he used? Until this question can be an- 
swered, I know not how to avoid the conclusion 
here, that the apostle does refer to a future and 
endless punishment. 



rEENNA. 

1. The word Gehenna is derived, as all agree, 
from the Hebrew words D3H *1; which, in pro- 
cess of time, passing into other languages, assumed 
diverse forms: e.g. Chaldee, Gehinnam; Arabic, 
Gahannam; Greek, Gehenna. 

The valley of Hinnom is a part (the eastern sec- 
tion) of the pleasant wady or valley which bounds 
Jerusalem on the south, Josh. xv. 8, xviii. 6. 
Here, in ancient times, and under some of the 



192 Meaning of 

idolatrous kings, the worship of Moloch, the 
horrid idol-god of the Ammonites, was practised. 
To this idol children were offered in sacrifice, 
2 Kings xxiii. 10; Ezek. xxiii. 37, 39; 2 Chron. 
xxviii. 3; Lev. xviii. 21, xx. 2. If we may credit 
the Rabbins, the head of the idol was like that of 
an ox, while the rest of its body resembled that of 
a man. It was hollow within, and, being heated by 
fire, children were laid in its arms and were there 
literally roasted alive. We cannot wonder, then, 
at the severe terms in which the worship of 
Moloch is everywhere denounced in the Scrip- 
tures. Nor can we wonder that the place itself 
should have been called Tophet, i.e. abomination, 
detestation (from fpjl to vomit with loathing), Jer. 
xxxi. 32, xix. 6 ; 2 Kings xxiii. 10 ; Ezek. xxiii. 
37, 39. 

After these sacrifices had ceased, the place was 
desecrated, and made one of loathing and horror. 
The pious king Josiah caused it to be polluted, 
2 Kings xxiii. 10; ix. he caused to be carried there 
the filth of the city of Jerusalem. It would seem 
that the custom of desecrating this place, thus 
happily begun, was continued in after-ages down 
to the period when our Saviour was on earth. 
Perpetual fires were kept up, in order to consume 
the offal which was deposited there. And as the 



Gehenna. 193 

same offal would breed worms (for so all putrefy- 
ing meat of course does), hence came the expres- 
sion, " Where the worm dieth not, and the fire is 
not quenched." 

It is admitted that the Jews of later date used 
the word Gehenna to denote Tartarus, i.e. the 
place of infernal punishment. The question here 
to be discussed is, whether this name is literally 
employed in the New Testament, or whether it 
designates a place of future punishment or the 
future world of woe. 

It is of some importance to this investigation, 
to inquire whether the Jews were ever accustomed 
to execute malefactors by burning them. 

That such a mode of punishment was once 
practised, and in certain cases even enjoined by 
the Mosaic law, is certain from Gen. xxxviii. 24 ; 
Lev. xx. 14, xxi. 9 -; Josh. xv. 25. But that the 
Jews were accustomed to execute criminals in this 
way, in our Saviour's time, there is no certain 
proof. The allusion, however, in Matt. v. 22, 
seems almost necessarily to imply that such was 
the fact. 

The word Gehenna, then, when used in respect 
to a place of punishment, may be used, or might 
have been used, literally. The question whether 
it is employed in its literal or in its secondary 

17 



194 Meaning of 

and spiritual sense, in the New Testament, comes 
now to be examined. 

The only passage which seems to me even 
capable of the literal sense is Matt. v. 22. The 
Saviour here says, " Every one who is angry at 
his brother, is obnoxious rfj xpiaec" i.e. as it were, 
to a punishment inflicted by a lower court,- — viz., 
that of the Septemviri among the Hebrews ; " but 
whoever shall say to his brother, Kaca, shall be 
obnoxious to the Sanhedrim," or highest council, 
who could inflict severer punishment than the 
court of Septemviri, q.d. he will deserve still 
severer punishment than he who is merely angry ; 
" but he who shall say, picopi, shall be obnoxious 
e/c tty r&evvav zoo nupoz" i.e. lit. to the fire of the 
valley of Hinnom, q.d. to a still higher and more 
severe punishment, such as is inflicted by burning 
to death in the valley of Hinnom. 

Is all this literal, or spiritual ? How can it be 
literal ? Our Saviour had just said that the Jews 
adjudged him only to be guilty of murder who 
actually killed a man. He then declares that in 
the sight of God this whole matter appears in a 
very different light. It is not the external act only 
which he regards. The spirit which is cherished 
and exhibited constitutes an essential part of the 
crime, as it is viewed by him. Accordingly, he 



Gehenna. 195 

who cherishes an angry and revengeful spirit is 
exposed to punishment; he who lets this spirit 
break out into provoking and reproachful lan- 
guage is more guilty still ; but he who gives loose 
to his passion, so as to utter epithets of the highest 
reproach, such as would destroy the character or 
endanger the life of the person against whom 
they were uttered, — he should be deemed worthy 
of the most signal punishment of all, like that 
inflicted in the valley of Hinnom. 

It must be very plain, now, to every considerate 
reader, that the Saviour (who had just declared 
that the Jews regarded nothing to be killing or 
murder except the external act, and who of course 
did not punish any thing else or take any cogni- 
zance of it) could not here mean to say that the 
Jews would literally punish the various grada- 
tions of crime which he marks. This would be 
to contradict what he had just said. We must 
suppose, then, that he means to designate the 
punishment which God, who could judge the 
heart, would inflict, and which must be spiritual. 
Surely it cannot be meant that God would sub- 
ject persons who cherished anger, to a literal court 
of the Septemviri, or to the literal Sanhedrim, or 
to the literal fire in the valley of Hinnom. What 
is meant must then be, that God would punish, 



196 Meaning of 

in a future world, with different degrees of seve- 
rity which were signified or symbolized by the 
punishment inflicted by the Septemviri, by the 
Sanhedrim, and by being burned in the valley of 
Hinnom. It seems impossible to give the passage 
any other rational, defensible meaning. 

It follows, of course, that although Gehenna is 
here referred to in its literal sense, yet the mean- 
ing of the whole passage does not permit us to 
understand the idea intended to be conveyed as a 
literal one. It is employed as a source of ima- 
gery, to describe the punishment of a future world, 
which the Judge of all hearts and intentions will 
inflict. 

What has now been said will render the other 
examples of Gehenna that follow, easy to be un- 
derstood. Thus, — 

Matt. v. 29, the Saviour declares that "he who 
does not 'cut off' an offending member of his 
body, shall be cast into Gehenna" Most certainly 
this cannot be understood of a literal casting into 
Gehenna; for who was to execute such a punish- 
ment? Not the Jewish courts, for they had no 
cognizance of the offence which a man's right 
hand or right eye moved him to commit; i.e. they 
could not call in question and punish a member 
of the human body, because it tempted its owner 



Gehenna. 197 

to sin. It must then be a punishment which God 
would inflict. But was this a literal casting into 
the valley of Hinnom ? 

It may, however, be said that the caution of the 
Saviour runs thus : "Avoid all temptation to sin, 
lest you bring on yourself the terrible punishment 
of being burned in the valley of Hinnom, in case 
you give way to any temptation." 

This would be a possible interpretation, pro- 
vided the crimes in question could be shown to 
be of such a nature as were punishable in this 
manner by the Jewish courts. But, as this can- 
not be done, this exegesis seems to be fairly in- 
capable of admission. 

Matt. v. 30, another example of the same na- 
ture as that in v. 29. 

Matt, xviii. 9, an instance of the same nature, 
excepting that the phrase here is fiery Gehenna, 
which one cannot doubt has the same meaning as 
unquenchable fire, Mark ix. 43, 45, inasmuch as 
this very phrase is there used to explain Gehenna; 
the same meaning also as the lake of fire, Rev. xx. 
14, 15, xxi. 8, which is "the second death," Rev. 
xxi. 9. 

Mark ix. 43, ix. 45, the like cases with Matt. 
v. 29, and where in both instances "unquench- 
able fire" is added, in order to explain the 

17* 



198 Meaning of 

tremendous nature of the Gehenna in ques- 
tion. 

Mark ix. 47 the same as Matt, xviii. 9. 



There is a second class of cases, where Gehenna 
appears to be used more simply still, that is, with 
immediate reference to the world of woe, or a state 
of punishment. E.g. 

Matt, xxiii. 15, the Scribes and Pharisees are 
said to compass sea and land, in order to make 
proselytes; and when this is accomplished, the 
proselyte becomes " twofold more a son of Ge- 
henna than themselves," i.e. he is doubly deserv- 
ing of the punishment of hell. Surely the Sa- 
viour does not mean to say that he will suffer 
double the punishment literally to be inflicted 
on them, in the literal valley of Hinnom. 

Matt, xxiii. 30, How can ye [Scribes and Pha- 
risees] escape the damnation of Gehenna? Does 
the Saviour mean here to ask, " How can ye escape 
being burned alive in the valley of Hinnom?" 
Were they in any danger of this ? 

James iii. 6, The tongue ... is set on fire of 
Gehenna. Does James mean to say that a slan- 
derous, boasting tongue is literally set on fire by 
the valley of Hinnom ? Or does Gehenna here 



Gehenna. 199 

mean hell, which, like the name of a region or 
country, is used to denote those who dwell in it, 
— viz., malignant spirits ? 



There remain two examples more, which put 
the question out of all possible doubt in respect 
to a literal construction. 

Matt. x. 28, Fear not them who kill the body, 
but cannot kill the soul ; but rather fear him who 
can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna. The 
body might, indeed, be literally burned in the 
valley of Hinnom; but the immaterial, immortal 
soul — is that to be literally burned there ? 

Luke xii. 5, Fear him who after killing hath 
power to cast into Gehenna; a passage parallel 
with the one above, and of the same import. 

These are all the instances in which the word 
Gehenna is employed by the sacred writers. It 
exists not among the Greek classic writers, because 
it is a mere Hebrew word. No light, then, can 
come from that quarter, in order to illustrate its 
meaning. 

That the word Gehenna was common among 
the Jews, is evinced by its frequency in the oldest 
Rabbinical writings. It was employed by them, 
as all confess, in order to designate hell, the infer- 



200 Meaning of Gehenna. 

nal region, the world of woe. In no other sense 
can it in any way be made out that it is employed 
in the New Testament. 

Now, as all appellations to designate either 
heaven or hell must be taken from sensible ob- 
jects (see on Sheol, 3, 4), so there is not the least 
difficulty as to the usage in question. Heaven is 
called a paradise, Luke xxiii. 43; 2 Cor. xii. 2; 
Rev. ii. 7, although this word originally means 
park, garden, pleasure-garden, Cant. iv. 13; Neh. 
ii. 8; Ecc. ii. 5, and is of Persian origin. So hell 
may be called Gehenna, although the original 
sense of the word is only valley of Hinnom. 
What could be a more appropriate term than 
this, when we consider the horrid cruelties and 
diabolical rites which had been there performed ? 
Indeed, it seems quite probable, as Gesenius sug- 
gests, that " Gehenna came to be used as a desig- 
nation of the infernal regions, because the Hebrews 
supposed that demons dwelt in this valley." 



GENERAL REMARKS. 



And now, in view of the results which the 
whole of the preceding investigations afford, what 
says the understanding ? What says conscience ? 

The question is not, what this or that indivi- 
dual may wish or desire to be true; but, What 
have the sacred writers taught ? This latter ques- 
tion can be answered in no satisfactory way but 
by inquiring what the language means, which 
they have employed. The meaning of this is 
surely to be made out by philology, i.e. by an 
investigation conducted agreeably to the prin- 
ciples of language ; not by philosophy, i.e. by a 
priori speculations about the nature of God's moral 
government. And even in this latter method, 
if analogy is of any force, the question must be 
decided in the affirmative with regard to future 
punishment. What earthly government ever 
existed, or can exist, without any punishments ? 

Is there, then, a moral government of God as 
a spiritual being? Is there another world, where 
moral beings are to be governed ? If so, who can 

m 201 



202 General Remarks. 

render it probable, even by a priori argument, 
that there is no punishment there ? 

But our question is with the Bible. Does this 
reveal a place of future punishment? To say- 
that this is absurd, or impossible, is only to pre- 
judge the question without examining it. The 
results of a philological examination of the Scrip- 
tures are, that a place of punishment after death 
is disclosed by the sacred writers, and by the 
Saviour of men. I am well aware that this is 
contradicted and denied. But, then, neither 
contradiction nor denial, in this case, springs 
from philology, but from inclination, wishes, 
philosophy, or prejudice. If this be not so, why 
is not philology arrayed, in all its proper strength, 
against the idea that there is a place of future 
punishment? Who has done this? How is it 
to be done ? All the examples in the Scriptures, 
of the various words above examined, are pro- 
duced in these essays. There is no concealment. 
I trust there is no attempt to pervert or fritter 
away their obvious meaning. I am certain there 
is no such design on my part. Let them be philo- 
logically and critically set aside, or shown to be erro- 
neously interpreted, and, so far as I am concerned, 
I promise to institute de novo another examination. 

I address those who acknowledge the Scrip- 



General Remarks. 203 

tures as the source of their faith ; and I put again 
the questions, What says the understanding? 
"What says conscience ? 

If any one should reply and say, "The words 
Sheol, Hades, Tartarus, and Gehenna, all have a 
literal signification, and designate objects real or 
imaginary belonging only to the present world," 
the answer to this has already been given. It 
is simply this, — viz., that all words which cha- 
racterize a future world are and must be of the 
like nature. They all originally have a literal 
sense. This they must have, else they could not 
be used in a figurative or secondary sense. The 
Hebrew D*0£^, heavens, has a literal sense, and 
so also the Greek obpavo^ ; both mean the airy 
region above the earth, the welkin above, the ap- 
parent expanse over our heads. But have they, 
therefore, no other sense? Do they not often 
designate the place where God dwells, the abode 
of the blessed in a future world ? None will be 
so unreasonable as to deny this. 

Paradise has a literal sense, — viz., that of 
garden, pleasure-garden, orchard of fruit and 
flower-trees, etc.; but has it always such a mean- 
ing ? When our Saviour tells the penitent thief 
that he should be with him in paradise; or when 
Paul was caught up into paradise ; or when the 



204 General Remarks. 

Saviour promises to the Ephesian church that 
he who overcomes shall eat of the tree of life 
in the paradise of God, is nothing but a literal 
garden meant? The most zealous advocates 
of benevolence and good-will (so called) would 
blush at such an interpretation as this. 

When the wicked, then, are represented as 
being sent to Sheol, and the rich man as lifting 
up his eyes in Hades, being in torments, or the 
evil angels as being confined in chains of dark- 
ness in Tartarus, is all this to be understood only 
of a literal grave, or sepulchre, or under- world ? 
And when we are commanded to fear Him who 
can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna, is 
this destruction to be a literal one in the literal 
valley of Hinnom? Prejudice may possibly 
affirm this, or unbelief may scoff at it and refuse 
to examine it; but the reason and conscience of 
any man, who really believes the divine word, 
will tremble to decide in so unreasonable and 
presumptuous a manner. 

I advance one step further. There is not only 
a place of future punishment (just as surely as 
there is of future happiness, and on the like 
grounds), but that place is separated by an " im- 
passable gulf" from the region of the blessed. So 
the awful passage in Luke xvi. 19-26 informs 



General Remarks. 205 

us. The words of this passage, be it remembered, 
are those of the Saviour, who knows whether 
there is a hell as well as a heaven. They then 
that "would pass from the Hades of torments to 
the region of the blessed, cannot." (Luke xvi. 
26.) There is no commutation of place for them. 

The force of all this may be denied ; attempts 
may be made to fritter it away; they have been. 
There is no difficulty in all this. But how the 
impassable gulf fixed between heaven and hell 
by an almighty God is to be removed, or ren- 
dered passable, is a question which those who 
deal thus with the Saviour's words would do 
well seriously and timely to consider. 

It may be well to notice one more allegation, 
which has of late been strongly insisted on and 
greatly confided in by many who wish the doc- 
trine to be true which denies that there is any 
future punishment. In substance it is this, — viz., 
"that inasmuch as Hades and Sheol, Tartarus 
and Gehenna, designate either imaginary regions 
which are supposed to be subterranean, or else 
literally the valley of Hinnom at Jerusalem, it 
follows of course that no real place of future 
punishment is named in the Scriptures ; and if 
no place is pointed out, then we hojve reason to 
conclude that there is noneP 

18 



206 General Remarks. 

On this I remark^ (1.) That the same argument 
would prove that since Q]12$ or ohpavb^, and 
DTIID or napadecaoz, i.e. heaven and paradise, 
mean the region over our heads and a garden, 
therefore there is no place in which the righteous 
will be happy, unless it be in our atmosphere or 
in some earthly garden. On this argument I have 
already said all that I wish to say. " What proves 
too much, proves nothing." 

(2.) The laws of our Commonwealth declare that 
the man who commits murder shall be punished 
with death, i.e. with hanging by the neck until 
death supervene. Now, these same laws have no- 
where said in what place the gallows for hanging 
a murderer shall be erected, nor even that any shall 
be erected. Suppose, then, I deduce from this the 
conclusion that a murderer will not be punished, be- 
cause no place for his execution is designated. In 
reasoning thus, I do just what is done when con- 
clusions such as I am now examining are made. 

Supposing it to be fact that the Bible has no- 
where named the place in which future punish- 
ment will be inflicted : does this even touch the 
question, whether there will be any future punish- 
ment ? An answer to this is altogether superfluous. 

But the assumption itself is as ungrounded as 
the argument. In proof of this, I must refer the 



General Remarks. 207 

reader to the preceding pages. It is labor worse 
than lost, then, to publish books to prove that there 
is no future punishment, by such an ungrounded 
and manifestly erroneous argument as this. 

One more remark, and I have done, for the 
present. Let the sober inquirer who wishes to 
know the truth review the meaning of alcbv and 
aiajwoz, and ask whether the probability that 
future punishment will be endless does not mount 
so high that to call it in question is unreasonable 
and hazardous ? And if so, then to believe in the 
salvation of all men, and to live in such a manner 
as those usually do who thus believe, is presump- 
tuous beyond the power of human language to 
express. 

If Universalists are in the right, we who be- 
lieve in a doctrine very different from theirs are 
nevertheless just as safe as they. We need not 
concern ourselves to examine whether we are in 
the right or in the wrong as to opinion, since 
there can be no difference in the result. But if we 
are in the right, and they mistake fundamentally 
the meaning of God's word, and mistake it through 
the spirit of unbelief, and through desire to live 
without that self-control and self-denial which 
the gospel demands on penalty of everlasting 
death, then what is to be the end of all this? 



208 General Remarks. 

Is there any other case, any one that pertains 
merely to the present world, in which a man of 
common understanding and prudence could justify 
a risk like that in the present case? And are the 
interests of eternity to be more lightly regarded 
than those of time? Is the fancied pleasure of the 
undisturbed gratification of sensual appetites, for 
a few days, to be put in serious competition with 
the interests of a period which has no end? If 
so, then we may well say, with the Scriptures, 
" Madness is in their hearts while they live, and 
after that they go to the dead." 

But, oh, the never-dying soul! The judgment 
to come! The summons to appear before that 
tribunal on which eternal justice is seated! "Know- 
ing the terrors of the Lord, we would fain per- 
suade men." "It is indeed a fearful thing to fall 
into the hands of the living God, who is a con- 
suming fire;" who has said, "Vengeance is mine, 
I will repay." Blessed are those " over whom the 
Second Death hath no power !" Dreadful beyond 
the power of language to describe, beyond what 
any human mind can possibly conceive, must be 
the condition of those who will finally be cast into 
the lake of fire, which is the SECOND death, and 
there be tormented with the beast and the false pro- 
phet, day and night, FOR EVER AND EVER. 



